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

IF 2.6 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
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 ,&nbsp;Neal Ferrick MD ,&nbsp;Elaine Y. Wan MD ,&nbsp;Sanjiv M. Narayan MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Aileen M. Ferrick PhD ,&nbsp;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> &lt; .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 ,&nbsp;Neal Ferrick MD ,&nbsp;Elaine Y. Wan MD ,&nbsp;Sanjiv M. Narayan MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Aileen M. Ferrick PhD ,&nbsp;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> &lt; .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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景尽管远程监护(RM)在心脏植入式电子装置(CIED)患者中的应用几乎遍及全球,但在RM的吸收和使用方面却存在很大的地域差异。方法利用心律协会全球网络对所有 CIED 诊所人员进行国际调查,收集人口统计学信息、RM 使用情况、CIED 诊所组织情况以及当地报销和诊所资金的详细信息。每个中心最完整的回复都纳入了本次分析。结果 共有来自 47 个不同国家的 302 份回复被纳入分析,其中 61.3% 来自医生,62.3% 来自医院的 CIED 诊所。使用RM的CIED患者比例中位数为80%(四分位距为40-90)。使用 RM 的预测因素包括人均国民总收入(每 1000 美元 0.76%,95% CI 0.72-1.00,P < .001)、诊所(7.48%,95% CI 1.53-13.44,P = .014)和诊所资金(按患者付费模式 7.90% [95% CI 0.63-15.结论 RM 利用率的高差异可部分归因于经济和结构性障碍,这可能需要所有利益相关者为提高 RM 利用率做出具体努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cardiovascular digital health journal
Cardiovascular digital health journal Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
58 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信