Remote Monitoring of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Canada: Survey of Patients and Device Health Care Professionals
Remote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There is a need to optimize remote management for CIEDs because of the consistent increases in CIED implants over the past decade. The objective of this stu...
Saved in:
Published in | CJC open (Online) Vol. 3; no. 4; pp. 391 - 399 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
Elsevier Inc
01.04.2021
Elsevier |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Remote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There is a need to optimize remote management for CIEDs because of the consistent increases in CIED implants over the past decade. The objective of this study was to investigate real and perceived barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada and to better understand how remote models of care can be optimized.
We surveyed 512 CIED patients and practitioners in 22 device clinics in Canada.
Device clinic surveys highlighted significant variation and inconsistency in follow-up care for in-clinic and remote visits across and within clinics. This survey showed that funding policies and management of additional workflow are barriers to optimal use and uptake. Despite this, device clinics perceive remote follow-up as a valuable resource and an efficient way to manage patient follow-up. Patients were broadly satisfied with their CIED follow-up care but identified barriers related to coordination of care, visit logistics, and information needs. Views varied as a function of clinical or sociodemographic characteristics. Most patients (n = 228; 91%) expressed a desire to receive a phone call from their device clinic after a remote transmission has been received.
Lack of a unified, guideline-supported approach to follow-up after CIED implant, and discrepant funding policies across jurisdictions, are significant barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada. Efforts to increase or expand use of remote follow-up must recognize these barriers and the needs of specific subgroups of patients.
La télésurveillance sert de complément à la consultation en clinique des patients porteurs d’un dispositif cardiaque électronique implantable (DCEI) tous les 6 à 12 mois. Il est nécessaire d’optimiser la prise en charge à distance des patients porteurs de DCEI en raison de la constante augmentation des implantations de DCEI au cours de la dernière décennie. L’objectif de la présente étude était d’examiner les obstacles réels et perçus à l’utilisation des stratégies de prise en charge à distance des patients du Canada et de mieux comprendre la façon d’optimiser les modèles de soins à distance.
Nous avons interrogé 512 patients porteurs de DCEI et praticiens de 22 cliniques spécialisées en DCEI du Canada.
Les enquêtes des cliniques spécialisées en DCEI ont fait ressortir la variation importante et le manque d’uniformité dans les soins de suivi lors des consultations en clinique et à distance au sein de toutes les cliniques et entre elles. Cette enquête a montré que les politiques de financement et la gestion du flux de travail supplémentaire sont les obstacles qui empêchent l’utilisation optimale et l’adoption. Malgré cela, les cliniques spécialisées en DCEI perçoivent le suivi à distance comme une ressource très utile et un moyen efficace de prendre en charge le suivi du patient. Les patients étaient dans l’ensemble satisfaits de leurs soins de suivi relatifs à leur DCEI, mais relevaient des obstacles liés à la coordination des soins, à la logistique des consultations et à leurs besoins d’information. Les points de vue variaient en fonction des caractéristiques cliniques et sociodémographiques. La plupart des patients (n = 228 ; 91 %) ont fait part de leur souhait de recevoir un appel téléphonique de leur clinique spécialisée en DCEI après la réception de la transmission à distance.
L’absence d’une approche unifiée et fondée sur les lignes directrices qui porte sur le suivi après l’implantation de DCEI, et la divergence des politiques de financement des provinces et territoires sont des obstacles importants à l’utilisation de stratégies de prise en charge à distance des patients au Canada. Les efforts visant à accroître ou à étendre l’utilisation du suivi à distance doivent tenir compte de ces obstacles et des besoins des sous-groupes particuliers de patients. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Remote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There is a need to optimize remote management for CIEDs because of the consistent increases in CIED implants over the past decade. The objective of this study was to investigate real and perceived barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada and to better understand how remote models of care can be optimized.
We surveyed 512 CIED patients and practitioners in 22 device clinics in Canada.
Device clinic surveys highlighted significant variation and inconsistency in follow-up care for in-clinic and remote visits across and within clinics. This survey showed that funding policies and management of additional workflow are barriers to optimal use and uptake. Despite this, device clinics perceive remote follow-up as a valuable resource and an efficient way to manage patient follow-up. Patients were broadly satisfied with their CIED follow-up care but identified barriers related to coordination of care, visit logistics, and information needs. Views varied as a function of clinical or sociodemographic characteristics. Most patients (n = 228; 91%) expressed a desire to receive a phone call from their device clinic after a remote transmission has been received.
Lack of a unified, guideline-supported approach to follow-up after CIED implant, and discrepant funding policies across jurisdictions, are significant barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada. Efforts to increase or expand use of remote follow-up must recognize these barriers and the needs of specific subgroups of patients.
La télésurveillance sert de complément à la consultation en clinique des patients porteurs d’un dispositif cardiaque électronique implantable (DCEI) tous les 6 à 12 mois. Il est nécessaire d’optimiser la prise en charge à distance des patients porteurs de DCEI en raison de la constante augmentation des implantations de DCEI au cours de la dernière décennie. L’objectif de la présente étude était d’examiner les obstacles réels et perçus à l’utilisation des stratégies de prise en charge à distance des patients du Canada et de mieux comprendre la façon d’optimiser les modèles de soins à distance.
Nous avons interrogé 512 patients porteurs de DCEI et praticiens de 22 cliniques spécialisées en DCEI du Canada.
Les enquêtes des cliniques spécialisées en DCEI ont fait ressortir la variation importante et le manque d’uniformité dans les soins de suivi lors des consultations en clinique et à distance au sein de toutes les cliniques et entre elles. Cette enquête a montré que les politiques de financement et la gestion du flux de travail supplémentaire sont les obstacles qui empêchent l’utilisation optimale et l’adoption. Malgré cela, les cliniques spécialisées en DCEI perçoivent le suivi à distance comme une ressource très utile et un moyen efficace de prendre en charge le suivi du patient. Les patients étaient dans l’ensemble satisfaits de leurs soins de suivi relatifs à leur DCEI, mais relevaient des obstacles liés à la coordination des soins, à la logistique des consultations et à leurs besoins d’information. Les points de vue variaient en fonction des caractéristiques cliniques et sociodémographiques. La plupart des patients (n = 228 ; 91 %) ont fait part de leur souhait de recevoir un appel téléphonique de leur clinique spécialisée en DCEI après la réception de la transmission à distance.
L’absence d’une approche unifiée et fondée sur les lignes directrices qui porte sur le suivi après l’implantation de DCEI, et la divergence des politiques de financement des provinces et territoires sont des obstacles importants à l’utilisation de stratégies de prise en charge à distance des patients au Canada. Les efforts visant à accroître ou à étendre l’utilisation du suivi à distance doivent tenir compte de ces obstacles et des besoins des sous-groupes particuliers de patients. Remote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There is a need to optimize remote management for CIEDs because of the consistent increases in CIED implants over the past decade. The objective of this study was to investigate real and perceived barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada and to better understand how remote models of care can be optimized. We surveyed 512 CIED patients and practitioners in 22 device clinics in Canada. Device clinic surveys highlighted significant variation and inconsistency in follow-up care for in-clinic and remote visits across and within clinics. This survey showed that funding policies and management of additional workflow are barriers to optimal use and uptake. Despite this, device clinics perceive remote follow-up as a valuable resource and an efficient way to manage patient follow-up. Patients were broadly satisfied with their CIED follow-up care but identified barriers related to coordination of care, visit logistics, and information needs. Views varied as a function of clinical or sociodemographic characteristics. Most patients (n = 228; 91%) expressed a desire to receive a phone call from their device clinic after a remote transmission has been received. Lack of a unified, guideline-supported approach to follow-up after CIED implant, and discrepant funding policies across jurisdictions, are significant barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada. Efforts to increase or expand use of remote follow-up must recognize these barriers and the needs of specific subgroups of patients. Background: Remote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There is a need to optimize remote management for CIEDs because of the consistent increases in CIED implants over the past decade. The objective of this study was to investigate real and perceived barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada and to better understand how remote models of care can be optimized. Methods: We surveyed 512 CIED patients and practitioners in 22 device clinics in Canada. Results: Device clinic surveys highlighted significant variation and inconsistency in follow-up care for in-clinic and remote visits across and within clinics. This survey showed that funding policies and management of additional workflow are barriers to optimal use and uptake. Despite this, device clinics perceive remote follow-up as a valuable resource and an efficient way to manage patient follow-up. Patients were broadly satisfied with their CIED follow-up care but identified barriers related to coordination of care, visit logistics, and information needs. Views varied as a function of clinical or sociodemographic characteristics. Most patients (n = 228; 91%) expressed a desire to receive a phone call from their device clinic after a remote transmission has been received. Conclusions: Lack of a unified, guideline-supported approach to follow-up after CIED implant, and discrepant funding policies across jurisdictions, are significant barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada. Efforts to increase or expand use of remote follow-up must recognize these barriers and the needs of specific subgroups of patients. Résumé: Introduction: La télésurveillance sert de complément à la consultation en clinique des patients porteurs d’un dispositif cardiaque électronique implantable (DCEI) tous les 6 à 12 mois. Il est nécessaire d’optimiser la prise en charge à distance des patients porteurs de DCEI en raison de la constante augmentation des implantations de DCEI au cours de la dernière décennie. L’objectif de la présente étude était d’examiner les obstacles réels et perçus à l’utilisation des stratégies de prise en charge à distance des patients du Canada et de mieux comprendre la façon d’optimiser les modèles de soins à distance. Méthodes: Nous avons interrogé 512 patients porteurs de DCEI et praticiens de 22 cliniques spécialisées en DCEI du Canada. Résultats: Les enquêtes des cliniques spécialisées en DCEI ont fait ressortir la variation importante et le manque d’uniformité dans les soins de suivi lors des consultations en clinique et à distance au sein de toutes les cliniques et entre elles. Cette enquête a montré que les politiques de financement et la gestion du flux de travail supplémentaire sont les obstacles qui empêchent l’utilisation optimale et l’adoption. Malgré cela, les cliniques spécialisées en DCEI perçoivent le suivi à distance comme une ressource très utile et un moyen efficace de prendre en charge le suivi du patient. Les patients étaient dans l’ensemble satisfaits de leurs soins de suivi relatifs à leur DCEI, mais relevaient des obstacles liés à la coordination des soins, à la logistique des consultations et à leurs besoins d’information. Les points de vue variaient en fonction des caractéristiques cliniques et sociodémographiques. La plupart des patients (n = 228 ; 91 %) ont fait part de leur souhait de recevoir un appel téléphonique de leur clinique spécialisée en DCEI après la réception de la transmission à distance. Conclusions: L’absence d’une approche unifiée et fondée sur les lignes directrices qui porte sur le suivi après l’implantation de DCEI, et la divergence des politiques de financement des provinces et territoires sont des obstacles importants à l’utilisation de stratégies de prise en charge à distance des patients au Canada. Les efforts visant à accroître ou à étendre l’utilisation du suivi à distance doivent tenir compte de ces obstacles et des besoins des sous-groupes particuliers de patients. BACKGROUNDRemote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There is a need to optimize remote management for CIEDs because of the consistent increases in CIED implants over the past decade. The objective of this study was to investigate real and perceived barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada and to better understand how remote models of care can be optimized. METHODSWe surveyed 512 CIED patients and practitioners in 22 device clinics in Canada. RESULTSDevice clinic surveys highlighted significant variation and inconsistency in follow-up care for in-clinic and remote visits across and within clinics. This survey showed that funding policies and management of additional workflow are barriers to optimal use and uptake. Despite this, device clinics perceive remote follow-up as a valuable resource and an efficient way to manage patient follow-up. Patients were broadly satisfied with their CIED follow-up care but identified barriers related to coordination of care, visit logistics, and information needs. Views varied as a function of clinical or sociodemographic characteristics. Most patients (n = 228; 91%) expressed a desire to receive a phone call from their device clinic after a remote transmission has been received. CONCLUSIONSLack of a unified, guideline-supported approach to follow-up after CIED implant, and discrepant funding policies across jurisdictions, are significant barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada. Efforts to increase or expand use of remote follow-up must recognize these barriers and the needs of specific subgroups of patients. |
Author | Lockwood, Evan Parkash, Ratika Nault, Isabelle AbdelWahab, Amir Kelly, Shannon E. Campbell, Debra Doucette, Steve Duhn, Lenora J. Raj, Satish R. Giddens, Karen Gillis, Anne M. Basta, Jessica Wells, George A. |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Shannon E. surname: Kelly fullname: Kelly, Shannon E. organization: University of Ottawa, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada – sequence: 2 givenname: Debra surname: Campbell fullname: Campbell, Debra organization: Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada – sequence: 3 givenname: Lenora J. surname: Duhn fullname: Duhn, Lenora J. organization: School of Nursing, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada – sequence: 4 givenname: Karen surname: Giddens fullname: Giddens, Karen organization: QEII Health Sciences Center, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada – sequence: 5 givenname: Anne M. surname: Gillis fullname: Gillis, Anne M. organization: University of Calgary, Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Calgary, Alberta Canada – sequence: 6 givenname: Amir orcidid: 0000-0002-2410-6892 surname: AbdelWahab fullname: AbdelWahab, Amir organization: QEII Health Sciences Center, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada – sequence: 7 givenname: Isabelle surname: Nault fullname: Nault, Isabelle organization: Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie and Pneumologie de Quebec, Quebec, Canada – sequence: 8 givenname: Satish R. surname: Raj fullname: Raj, Satish R. organization: University of Calgary, Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Calgary, Alberta Canada – sequence: 9 givenname: Evan orcidid: 0000-0002-8033-9770 surname: Lockwood fullname: Lockwood, Evan organization: CK Hui Heart Centre, Royal Alexandria Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada – sequence: 10 givenname: Jessica surname: Basta fullname: Basta, Jessica organization: QEII Health Sciences Center, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada – sequence: 11 givenname: Steve surname: Doucette fullname: Doucette, Steve organization: Research Methods Unit, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada – sequence: 12 givenname: George A. surname: Wells fullname: Wells, George A. organization: University of Ottawa, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada – sequence: 13 givenname: Ratika surname: Parkash fullname: Parkash, Ratika email: Ratika.parkash@nshealth.ca organization: Department of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34027341$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp9kk1vEzEQhleoiJbSP8AB-cglYfy1m0UICYVCIxVR8SFxs2bt2dbRxk7tTaT-AP43DglVe-E01vidx-OZ93l1FGKgqnrJYcqB12-WU7u0cSpAlASfAocn1YnQs3bStPDr6MH5uDrLeQkAQnKlNTyrjqUC0UjFT6rf32gVR2JfYvBjTD5cs9izOSbn4xaz3QyY2GK1HjCM2A3EzgeyYypqyz7S1lvKzIdSENDhW_Z9k7Z0t0Nc4egpjJlhcAcluyAcxpsdndhVij3l7GPAIb-onvYl0NkhnlY_P53_mF9MLr9-Xsw_XE6snjXjpNN6JjVy0Ta2V6Co7gQBuJqQU60IGi61ww6Rg5IdCo4tt23LBYmuJSVPq8We6yIuzTr5FaY7E9Gbv4mYrg2m0duBTF072wDvNW9apQW1qreF78gplNJCYb3fs9abbkXOls8mHB5BH98Ef2Ou49bMSv9K1gXw-gBI8XZDeTQrny0NZdQUN9kILblW0MKsSMVealPMOVF__wwHs7ODWZqdHczODoZzU-xQil49bPC-5N_yi-DdXkBl5FtPyWRbdmbJ-VSWXGbi_8f_A8eTyfs |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1111_pace_14348 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cjca_2022_01_031 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11897_023_00586_1 crossref_primary_10_1007_s12170_023_00720_7 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cjca_2022_01_022 crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph19010312 crossref_primary_10_9778_cmajo_20200041 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ccep_2021_04_008 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cjco_2024_02_003 crossref_primary_10_1093_europace_euad123 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_hlc_2023_03_015 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_hrthm_2023_03_1525 crossref_primary_10_4018_JOEUC_316165 crossref_primary_10_1002_joa3_12851 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_hroo_2023_04_005 |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.cjca.2018.01.003 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.05.008 10.1007/s00392-008-0712-3 10.1093/europace/eut116 10.1093/europace/euu390 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.04.031 10.1093/europace/eut111 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.04.029 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2013.03.002 10.1016/j.cjca.2016.09.009 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2009.01659.x 10.1016/j.cjca.2012.11.036 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.10.001 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society |
Copyright_xml | – notice: 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society – notice: 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. – notice: 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society |
DBID | 6I. AAFTH NPM AAYXX CITATION 7X8 5PM DOA |
DOI | 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010 |
DatabaseName | ScienceDirect Open Access Titles Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access PubMed CrossRef MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitle | PubMed CrossRef MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 2589-790X |
EndPage | 399 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_66dc701f5179452e94fc071ded4a33c0 10_1016_j_cjco_2020_11_010 34027341 S2589790X20301980 |
Genre | Journal Article |
GroupedDBID | .1- .FO 0SF 53G 6I. AACTN AAEDW AAFTH AALRI AAXUO ABMAC AEXQZ AFCTW AFRHN AFTJW AITUG AJUYK ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMRAJ EBS EJD FDB GROUPED_DOAJ M41 M~E NCXOZ OK1 ROL RPM SSZ Z5R 0R~ ADVLN AFJKZ NPM AAYXX CITATION 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c587t-b55835a1297cf404e6b2e00d6ea1e64e07135dabaa1043ba21a91c9912e2b9e43 |
IEDL.DBID | RPM |
ISSN | 2589-790X |
IngestDate | Tue Oct 22 15:09:45 EDT 2024 Tue Sep 17 21:28:27 EDT 2024 Fri Oct 25 09:44:07 EDT 2024 Thu Sep 26 18:28:34 EDT 2024 Wed Dec 11 11:56:42 EST 2024 Thu Jul 20 20:14:01 EDT 2023 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 4 |
Language | English |
License | This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license. 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c587t-b55835a1297cf404e6b2e00d6ea1e64e07135dabaa1043ba21a91c9912e2b9e43 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ORCID | 0000-0002-2410-6892 0000-0002-8033-9770 |
OpenAccessLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8129436/ |
PMID | 34027341 |
PQID | 2531540908 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
PageCount | 9 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_66dc701f5179452e94fc071ded4a33c0 pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8129436 proquest_miscellaneous_2531540908 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cjco_2020_11_010 pubmed_primary_34027341 elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_cjco_2020_11_010 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2021-04-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2021-04-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 04 year: 2021 text: 2021-04-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | United States |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States |
PublicationTitle | CJC open (Online) |
PublicationTitleAlternate | CJC Open |
PublicationYear | 2021 |
Publisher | Elsevier Inc Elsevier |
Publisher_xml | – name: Elsevier Inc – name: Elsevier |
References | Ottenberg, Swetz, Mueller (bib16) 2013; 42 Wah (bib18) Crossley, Chen, Choucair (bib6) 2009; 54 Gillis (bib12) 2013; 15 Mcloughlin (bib15) 2018; 7 Parthiban, Esterman, Mahajan (bib17) 2015; 65 Mairesse, Braunschweig, Klersy, Cowie, Leyva (bib19) 2015; 17 Hauck, Bauer, Voss (bib1) 2009; 98 Slotwiner, Varma, Akar (bib14) 2015; 12 Liu (bib13) Yee, Verma, Beardsall (bib3) 2013; 29 Cheung, Deyell (bib5) 2018; 34 bib2 Freeman, Saxon (bib9) 2015; 65 Al-Khatib, Piccini, Knight (bib10) 2010; 21 Wallace, Armstrong, Agarwal (bib4) Varma (bib8) 2013; 15 Elsner, Sommer, Piorkowski (bib7) 2006; 33 Bennett, Parkash, Nery (bib11) 2017; 33 Slotwiner (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib14) 2015; 12 Hauck (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib1) 2009; 98 Mairesse (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib19) 2015; 17 Varma (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib8) 2013; 15 Parthiban (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib17) 2015; 65 Freeman (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib9) 2015; 65 Al-Khatib (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib10) 2010; 21 Cheung (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib5) 2018; 34 Elsner (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib7) 2006; 33 Mcloughlin (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib15) 2018; 7 Wah (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib18) Liu (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib13) Gillis (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib12) 2013; 15 Yee (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib3) 2013; 29 Wallace (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib4) Bennett (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib11) 2017; 33 Ottenberg (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib16) 2013; 42 Crossley (10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib6) 2009; 54 |
References_xml | – volume: 42 start-page: 313 year: 2013 end-page: 319 ident: bib16 article-title: ‘We as human beings get farther and farther apart’: the experiences of patients with remote monitoring systems publication-title: Heart Lung contributor: fullname: Mueller – volume: 29 start-page: 644 year: 2013 end-page: 651 ident: bib3 article-title: Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Heart Rhythm Society joint position statement on the use of remote monitoring for cardiovascular implantable electronic device follow-up publication-title: Can J Cardiol contributor: fullname: Beardsall – volume: 21 start-page: 545 year: 2010 end-page: 550 ident: bib10 article-title: Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter defibrillators versus quarterly device interrogations in clinic: results from a randomized pilot clinical trial publication-title: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol contributor: fullname: Knight – volume: 7 start-page: 1 year: 2018 end-page: 4 ident: bib15 article-title: Understanding patient reluctance to the remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices publication-title: J Nurs Care contributor: fullname: Mcloughlin – volume: 15 start-page: i26 year: 2013 end-page: i31 ident: bib8 article-title: Automatic remote home monitoring of implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead and generator function: a system that tests itself everyday publication-title: Europace contributor: fullname: Varma – ident: bib2 article-title: Cardiac Rate Book, 2016: Cardiac Implants — Provincial Data – volume: 98 start-page: 19 year: 2009 end-page: 24 ident: bib1 article-title: ‘Home monitoring’ for early detection of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator failure: a single-center prospective observational study publication-title: Clin Res Cardiol contributor: fullname: Voss – ident: bib18 article-title: Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series. Remote Monitoring of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators, Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and Permanent Pacemakers: A Health Technology Assessment contributor: fullname: Wah – volume: 65 start-page: 2611 year: 2015 end-page: 2613 ident: bib9 article-title: Remote monitoring and outcomes in pacemaker and defibrillator patients: big data saving lives? publication-title: J Am Coll Cardiol contributor: fullname: Saxon – ident: bib13 article-title: Barriers to Remote Monitoring in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators contributor: fullname: Liu – volume: 34 start-page: 941 year: 2018 end-page: 944 ident: bib5 article-title: Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices publication-title: Can J Cardiol contributor: fullname: Deyell – volume: 33 start-page: 241 year: 2006 end-page: 244 ident: bib7 article-title: A prospective multicenter comparison trial of home monitoring against regular follow-up in MADIT II patients: additional visits and cost impact publication-title: Comput Cardiol contributor: fullname: Piorkowski – volume: 12 start-page: e69 year: 2015 end-page: e100 ident: bib14 article-title: HRS Expert Consensus Statement on remote interrogation and monitoring for cardiovascular implantable electronic devices publication-title: Heart Rhythm contributor: fullname: Akar – volume: 17 start-page: 814 year: 2015 end-page: 818 ident: bib19 article-title: Implementation and reimbursement of remote monitoring for cardiac implantable electronic devices in Europe: a survey from the health economics committee of the European Heart Rhythm Association publication-title: Europace contributor: fullname: Leyva – volume: 54 start-page: 2012 year: 2009 end-page: 2019 ident: bib6 article-title: Clinical benefits of remote versus transtelephonic monitoring of implanted pacemakers publication-title: J Am Coll Cardiol contributor: fullname: Choucair – volume: 15 start-page: i32 year: 2013 end-page: i34 ident: bib12 article-title: Expert commentary: how well has the call from Heart Rhythm Society/European Heart Rhythm Association for improved device monitoring been answered? publication-title: Europace contributor: fullname: Gillis – ident: bib4 article-title: Virtual Care: A Framework for a Patient-Centric System contributor: fullname: Agarwal – volume: 33 start-page: 174 year: 2017 end-page: 188 ident: bib11 article-title: Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Heart Rhythm Society 2016 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator guidelines publication-title: Can J Cardiol contributor: fullname: Nery – volume: 65 start-page: 2591 year: 2015 end-page: 2600 ident: bib17 article-title: Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes publication-title: J Am Coll Cardiol contributor: fullname: Mahajan – ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib4 contributor: fullname: Wallace – volume: 34 start-page: 941 year: 2018 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib5 article-title: Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices publication-title: Can J Cardiol doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2018.01.003 contributor: fullname: Cheung – ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib13 contributor: fullname: Liu – volume: 7 start-page: 1 year: 2018 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib15 article-title: Understanding patient reluctance to the remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices publication-title: J Nurs Care contributor: fullname: Mcloughlin – volume: 12 start-page: e69 year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib14 article-title: HRS Expert Consensus Statement on remote interrogation and monitoring for cardiovascular implantable electronic devices publication-title: Heart Rhythm doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.05.008 contributor: fullname: Slotwiner – volume: 98 start-page: 19 year: 2009 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib1 article-title: ‘Home monitoring’ for early detection of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator failure: a single-center prospective observational study publication-title: Clin Res Cardiol doi: 10.1007/s00392-008-0712-3 contributor: fullname: Hauck – volume: 15 start-page: i26 issue: suppl 1 year: 2013 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib8 article-title: Automatic remote home monitoring of implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead and generator function: a system that tests itself everyday publication-title: Europace doi: 10.1093/europace/eut116 contributor: fullname: Varma – volume: 17 start-page: 814 year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib19 article-title: Implementation and reimbursement of remote monitoring for cardiac implantable electronic devices in Europe: a survey from the health economics committee of the European Heart Rhythm Association publication-title: Europace doi: 10.1093/europace/euu390 contributor: fullname: Mairesse – volume: 65 start-page: 2611 year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib9 article-title: Remote monitoring and outcomes in pacemaker and defibrillator patients: big data saving lives? publication-title: J Am Coll Cardiol doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.04.031 contributor: fullname: Freeman – volume: 15 start-page: i32 issue: suppl 1 year: 2013 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib12 article-title: Expert commentary: how well has the call from Heart Rhythm Society/European Heart Rhythm Association for improved device monitoring been answered? publication-title: Europace doi: 10.1093/europace/eut111 contributor: fullname: Gillis – volume: 65 start-page: 2591 year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib17 article-title: Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes publication-title: J Am Coll Cardiol doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.04.029 contributor: fullname: Parthiban – volume: 42 start-page: 313 year: 2013 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib16 article-title: ‘We as human beings get farther and farther apart’: the experiences of patients with remote monitoring systems publication-title: Heart Lung doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2013.03.002 contributor: fullname: Ottenberg – ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib18 contributor: fullname: Wah – volume: 33 start-page: 174 year: 2017 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib11 article-title: Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Heart Rhythm Society 2016 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator guidelines publication-title: Can J Cardiol doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2016.09.009 contributor: fullname: Bennett – volume: 21 start-page: 545 year: 2010 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib10 article-title: Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter defibrillators versus quarterly device interrogations in clinic: results from a randomized pilot clinical trial publication-title: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2009.01659.x contributor: fullname: Al-Khatib – volume: 29 start-page: 644 year: 2013 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib3 article-title: Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Heart Rhythm Society joint position statement on the use of remote monitoring for cardiovascular implantable electronic device follow-up publication-title: Can J Cardiol doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2012.11.036 contributor: fullname: Yee – volume: 33 start-page: 241 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib7 article-title: A prospective multicenter comparison trial of home monitoring against regular follow-up in MADIT II patients: additional visits and cost impact publication-title: Comput Cardiol contributor: fullname: Elsner – volume: 54 start-page: 2012 year: 2009 ident: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010_bib6 article-title: Clinical benefits of remote versus transtelephonic monitoring of implanted pacemakers publication-title: J Am Coll Cardiol doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.10.001 contributor: fullname: Crossley |
SSID | ssj0002314550 |
Score | 2.2996495 |
Snippet | Remote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There is a need... BACKGROUNDRemote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There... Background: Remote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months.... |
SourceID | doaj pubmedcentral proquest crossref pubmed elsevier |
SourceType | Open Website Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Publisher |
StartPage | 391 |
SubjectTerms | Original |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1Lb9QwELZQDxUXBOUVKMhI3FAgcRxn3RuUVhVSUQVU2pvlx1jsHrKou4vED-B_M2NnVwlIcOGaRE7sGc98E898w9jLWora2yjL0ERXSnCxtAhryxZ9rwpQz6KmauTLj-riWn6Yt_NRqy_KCcv0wHnh3igVfFfVkaikZCtAy-jRLQYI0jaNz9F6JUbB1DKRuCQCbuos18502elqPlTM5OQuv_RU-SfIZLyuqHx25JUSef_EOf0JPn_PoRw5pfO77M6AJvnbPIt77Bb0R-zwcjgvv89-fgIUBfC8c-kXHl9FfjrJQeVEEIzrSzVU_GzfFYe_h2RE-KLnicLAnvDP25vv8IOGuMp0rGtu-zA8yXNFE40O_GrE-LF-wK7Pz76cXpRD44XSt7NuU7q2RWBmEQp0PspKgnICqioosDUoCamvX7DOWgzmGmdFbXXtEWkKEE6DbB6yg37Vw2PGVWsRwKgZIoEgFaIxhHzaAZoNVAUdq4K92i28-Zb5Ncwu8WxpSEyGxISBikExFewdyWb_JHFjpwuoMWbQGPMvjSlYu5OsGWBGhg841OKvL3-xUwODe5AOVmwPq-3aCDRkiHxxbgV7lNVi_4mNTAxCdcG6icJM5jC90y--Jp5vxF5aNurJ_5j0U3ZbUDZOyjk6Zgebmy08Qzi1cc_TzvkFwDscOg priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals |
Title | Remote Monitoring of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Canada: Survey of Patients and Device Health Care Professionals |
URI | https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cjco.2020.11.010 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34027341 https://search.proquest.com/docview/2531540908 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC8129436 https://doaj.org/article/66dc701f5179452e94fc071ded4a33c0 |
Volume | 3 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1Lb9QwEB61PVS9IMpzaamMxA1lNw_bu-HWLq0qpEUroFJvlh9j2BXNVvuoxA_gfzN2ktUGJA5cE8dxPGPP5_ibzwBvM55nVnueuMKbhKPxiSZYmwiKvdJhNvJlyEaefJLXN_zjrbjdA9HmwkTSvjWzfvXjrl_Nvkdu5f2dHbQ8scF0MqagVPJCDvZhn8LvzhJ9HvVbovZ2kyBTc7ns3IZEvzzMEH1agRzBYcGjskvWiUdRtr8Tlv6GnX-yJ3fC0dVjeNTgSHZet_cY9rB6AoeTZqf8Kfz6jGQEZPWYDT_v2MKzcYd9yoI0MPVsyJ5il9vzcNgHjNMHm1Usihfo9-zLZvmAP0MV01qIdcV05ZqSrM5lCrUjm-5ofayewc3V5dfxddIcuZBYMRquEyMEQTJN_Tu0nqccpckxTZ1EnaHkGE_0c9poTcu4wug802VmCWPmmJsSefEcDqpFhS-BSaEJusgRYQDHJeEwAnulQZowyAlKn_bgXdvx6r5W1lAt5WyugsVUsBgtURRZrAcXwTbbkkEVO15YLL-pxjeUlM4O08wH2TEuciy5t9Rih47rorBUiWgtqxqAUQMHqmr2z5e_ad1A0egLWyq6wsVmpXKawgjz0rf14EXtFtsmth7Wg2HHYTrf0L1DDh8VvhsHf_XfT57AUR7IN5FidAoH6-UGXxN6Wpuz-NfhLI6Z34VxG-c |
link.rule.ids | 230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,27924,27925,53791,53793 |
linkProvider | National Library of Medicine |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1bb9MwFD4aQxp7QVxHuRqJN5Q2Tmyn4Q3KpgLrVMEm7c2ynRNoxdKpFyR-AP-bYyepGpB44DUXx_Y59vkcf-czwCsuEu5MKaIiLW0k0JaRIVgbSYq9qkA-LHOfjTw5U-ML8fFSXu6BbHNhAmnf2Vm_-n7Vr2bfArfy-soNWp7YYDoZUVDKRaoGN-CmTLOc7yzS50HBJahvNykyNZvLzZ1P9Uv8HNGnNcghHKQiaLvwTkQKwv2dwPQ38PyTP7kTkE7uwO0GSbK3dY3vwh5W9-Bg0uyV34dfn5HMgKwetf73HVuUbNThnzIvDkx96_On2PH2RBz2HsMEwmYVC_IF5g37sln-wJ--iGktxbpipiqaJ1mdzeRLRzbdUftYPYCLk-Pz0ThqDl2InBxm68hKSaDMUA9nrhSxQGUTjONCoeGoBIYz_QpjjaGFXGpNwk3OHaHMBBObo0gfwn61qPARMCUNgRc1JBRQCEVIjOBebpGmDHKDvIx78LrteH1da2volnQ2195i2luMFimaLNaDd9422ye9Lna4sFh-1Y13aKUKl8W89MJjQiaYi9JRjQsshElTR4XI1rK6gRg1dKCiZv_8-MvWDTSNP7-pYipcbFY6oUmMUC-1rQdHtVtsq9h6WA-yjsN02tC9Qy4fNL4bF3_832--gFvj88mpPv1w9ukJHCaeihMIR09hf73c4DPCUmv7PIyc3-FzHkc |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1bb9MwFLZgSNVeEONaYGAk3lDaxLHdhretWzUunSpg0t4sX46hFUurXpD4Afxvjp2kakDigdc2dR2fzz6fk-98JuR1xllmteeJy71JOBifaKS1icDcKx1kQ1-EauTJpby44u-vxfXeUV9RtG_NrFd-v-mVs29RW7m8sf1GJ9afTkaYlAqey_7S-f5tckfkCLK9jfo8urhEB-66TKZSdNm5DeV-LKwTPdyHHJJOzqO_S9bKStG8v5Wc_iaff2oo95LS-B65W7NJelL1-ojcgvI-6Uzq9-UPyK9PgKEAWs3c8AiPLjwdtTSoNBgE4_iGGip6vjsVh55BXETorKTRwkC_pZ-3qx_wMzQxrexY11SXrr6SVhVNoXWg0z3Hj_VDcjU-_zK6SOqDFxIrhoNNYoRAYqZxlAfW85SDNAzS1EnQGUgO8Vw_p43WuJnLjWaZLjKLTJMBMwXw_BE5KBclPCFUCo0ERg6RCTgukY0h5SsM4LKBUCh82iVvmoFXy8pfQzXCs7kKEVMhYrhRURixLjkNsdldGbyx4weL1VdVI0RJ6ewgzXwwH-OCQcG9xR47cFznucVGRBNZVdOMij5gU7N__vmrBgYK52B4saJLWGzXiuFChswX761LHlew2HWxQViXDFqAad1D-xuEffT5rmH-9L9_-ZJ0pmdj9fHd5Ydn5JAFNU7UHD0nB5vVFo6RTm3MizhxfgPxvx9a |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Remote+Monitoring+of+Cardiovascular+Implantable+Electronic+Devices+in+Canada%3A+Survey+of+Patients+and+Device+Health+Care+Professionals&rft.jtitle=CJC+open+%28Online%29&rft.au=Kelly%2C+Shannon+E&rft.au=Campbell%2C+Debra&rft.au=Duhn%2C+Lenora+J&rft.au=Giddens%2C+Karen&rft.date=2021-04-01&rft.eissn=2589-790X&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=391&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.cjco.2020.11.010&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F34027341&rft.externalDocID=34027341 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2589-790X&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2589-790X&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2589-790X&client=summon |