Smartphone ECG Monitoring System Helps Lower Emergency Room and Clinic Visits in Post-Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Patients
- PMID: 32009826
- PMCID: PMC6974745
- DOI: 10.1177/1179546820901508
Smartphone ECG Monitoring System Helps Lower Emergency Room and Clinic Visits in Post-Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Patients
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of using a smartphone-based electrocardiography (ECG) monitoring device (ECG Check) on the frequency of clinic or emergency room visits in patients who underwent ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF).
Methods: Two groups of patients were identified and compared: The conventional monitoring group (CM group) included patients who were prescribed conventional event monitoring or Holter monitoring systems. The ECG Check group (EC group) included patients who were prescribed the ECG Check device for continuous monitoring in addition to conventional event monitoring. The primary outcome was the number of patient visits to clinic or emergency room. The feasibility, accuracy, and detection rate of mobile ECG Check were also evaluated.
Results: Ninety patients were studied (mean age: 66.2 ± 11 years, 64 males, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score: 2.6 ± 2). In the EC group, forty-five patients sent an average of 52.8 ± 6 ECG records for either routine monitoring or symptoms of potential AF during the follow-up period. The rhythm strips identified sinus rhythm (84.7%), sinus tachycardia (8.4%), AF (4.2%), and atrial flutter (0.9%). Forty-two EC transmissions (1.8%) were uninterpretable. Six patients (13%) in the EC group were seen in the clinic or emergency room over a 100-day study period versus 16 (33%) in the standard care arm (P value < 0.001).
Conclusions: Use of smartphone-based ECG monitoring led to a significant reduction in AF-related visits to clinic or emergency department in the postablation period.
Keywords: Mobile ECG; atrial ablation; atrial fibrillation.
© The Author(s) 2020.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Conflicting Interest:Dr N.F.M. has received consulting fees from Abbott, Biotronik, Wavelet Health, Cardiac Design, Medtronic, Preventice, Vytronus, Biosense Webster, Marrek, Inc., and Boston Scientific; has received research funding from Abbott, Boston Scientific, GE Healthcare, Siemens, Biotronik, Vytronus, and Biosense Webster; has an ownership interest in Marrek, Inc., and Cardiac Designs; and has conducted contracted research with Biosense Webster, Medtronic, St. Jude Medical, and Boston Scientific. Dr M.G.C. has received research funding from Wavelet Health, Biotronik, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
Figures
References
-
- Zimetbaum P. Atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166:ITC33-ITC48. - PubMed
-
- Go AS, Hylek EM, Phillips KA, et al. Prevalence of diagnosed atrial fibrillation in adults: national implications for rhythm management and stroke prevention: the AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) study. JAMA. 2001;285:2370-2375. - PubMed
-
- Benjamin EJ, Wolf PA, D’Agostino RB, Silbershatz H, Kannel WB, Levy D. Impact of atrial fibrillation on the risk of death: the Framingham Heart study. Circulation. 1998;98:946-952. - PubMed
-
- Kannel WB, Wolf PA, Benjamin EJ, Levy D. Prevalence, incidence, prognosis, and predisposing conditions for atrial fibrillation: population-based estimates. Am J Cardiol. 1998;82:2N-9N. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
