Bert Vandenberk MD, PhD , Neal Ferrick MD , Elaine Y. Wan MD , Sanjiv M. Narayan MD, PhD , Aileen M. Ferrick PhD , Satish R. Raj MD, MSCI
{"title":"全球心脏植入式电子设备远程监控使用情况的决定因素 - 一项国际调查的结果","authors":"Bert Vandenberk MD, PhD , Neal Ferrick MD , Elaine Y. Wan MD , Sanjiv M. Narayan MD, PhD , Aileen M. Ferrick PhD , Satish R. Raj MD, MSCI","doi":"10.1016/j.cvdhj.2024.03.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite near-global availability of remote monitoring (RM) in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), there is a high geographical variability in the uptake and use of RM. The underlying reasons for this geographic disparity remain largely unknown.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To study the determinants of worldwide RM utilization and identify locoregional barriers of RM uptake.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An international survey was administered to all CIED clinic personnel using the Heart Rhythm Society global network collecting demographic information, as well as information on the use of RM, the organization of the CIED clinic, and details on local reimbursement and clinic funding. The most complete response from each center was included in the current analysis. Stepwise forward multivariate linear regression was performed to identify determinants of the percentage of patients with a CIED on RM.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 302 responses from 47 different countries were included, 61.3% by physicians and 62.3% from hospital-based CIED clinics. The median percentage of CIED patients on RM was 80% (interquartile range, 40–90). Predictors of RM use were gross national income per capita (0.76% per US$1000, 95% CI 0.72–1.00, <em>P</em> < .001), office-based clinics (7.48%, 95% CI 1.53–13.44, <em>P</em> = .014), and presence of clinic funding (per-patient payment model 7.90% [95% CI 0.63–15.17, <em>P</em> = .033); global budget 3.56% (95% CI -6.14 to 13.25, <em>P</em> = .471]).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The high variability in RM utilization can partly be explained by economic and structural barriers that may warrant specific efforts by all stakeholders to increase RM utilization.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72527,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular digital health journal","volume":"5 3","pages":"Pages 141-148"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266669362400015X/pdfft?md5=7126c8593dc209a8a0c81fa9897f63c6&pid=1-s2.0-S266669362400015X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determinants of global cardiac implantable electrical device remote monitoring utilization – Results from an international survey\",\"authors\":\"Bert Vandenberk MD, PhD , Neal Ferrick MD , Elaine Y. Wan MD , Sanjiv M. Narayan MD, PhD , Aileen M. Ferrick PhD , Satish R. Raj MD, MSCI\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cvdhj.2024.03.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite near-global availability of remote monitoring (RM) in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), there is a high geographical variability in the uptake and use of RM. The underlying reasons for this geographic disparity remain largely unknown.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To study the determinants of worldwide RM utilization and identify locoregional barriers of RM uptake.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An international survey was administered to all CIED clinic personnel using the Heart Rhythm Society global network collecting demographic information, as well as information on the use of RM, the organization of the CIED clinic, and details on local reimbursement and clinic funding. The most complete response from each center was included in the current analysis. Stepwise forward multivariate linear regression was performed to identify determinants of the percentage of patients with a CIED on RM.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 302 responses from 47 different countries were included, 61.3% by physicians and 62.3% from hospital-based CIED clinics. The median percentage of CIED patients on RM was 80% (interquartile range, 40–90). Predictors of RM use were gross national income per capita (0.76% per US$1000, 95% CI 0.72–1.00, <em>P</em> < .001), office-based clinics (7.48%, 95% CI 1.53–13.44, <em>P</em> = .014), and presence of clinic funding (per-patient payment model 7.90% [95% CI 0.63–15.17, <em>P</em> = .033); global budget 3.56% (95% CI -6.14 to 13.25, <em>P</em> = .471]).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The high variability in RM utilization can partly be explained by economic and structural barriers that may warrant specific efforts by all stakeholders to increase RM utilization.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiovascular digital health journal\",\"volume\":\"5 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 141-148\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266669362400015X/pdfft?md5=7126c8593dc209a8a0c81fa9897f63c6&pid=1-s2.0-S266669362400015X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiovascular digital health journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266669362400015X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular digital health journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266669362400015X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Determinants of global cardiac implantable electrical device remote monitoring utilization – Results from an international survey
Background
Despite near-global availability of remote monitoring (RM) in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), there is a high geographical variability in the uptake and use of RM. The underlying reasons for this geographic disparity remain largely unknown.
Objectives
To study the determinants of worldwide RM utilization and identify locoregional barriers of RM uptake.
Methods
An international survey was administered to all CIED clinic personnel using the Heart Rhythm Society global network collecting demographic information, as well as information on the use of RM, the organization of the CIED clinic, and details on local reimbursement and clinic funding. The most complete response from each center was included in the current analysis. Stepwise forward multivariate linear regression was performed to identify determinants of the percentage of patients with a CIED on RM.
Results
A total of 302 responses from 47 different countries were included, 61.3% by physicians and 62.3% from hospital-based CIED clinics. The median percentage of CIED patients on RM was 80% (interquartile range, 40–90). Predictors of RM use were gross national income per capita (0.76% per US$1000, 95% CI 0.72–1.00, P < .001), office-based clinics (7.48%, 95% CI 1.53–13.44, P = .014), and presence of clinic funding (per-patient payment model 7.90% [95% CI 0.63–15.17, P = .033); global budget 3.56% (95% CI -6.14 to 13.25, P = .471]).
Conclusion
The high variability in RM utilization can partly be explained by economic and structural barriers that may warrant specific efforts by all stakeholders to increase RM utilization.