经批准的可穿戴心电图多中心临床试验的经验教训:问题和实际考虑。

IF 1.1 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Translational and Clinical Pharmacology Pub Date : 2022-06-01 Epub Date: 2022-05-24 DOI:10.12793/tcp.2022.30.e7
Ki Young Huh, Sae Im Jeong, Hyounggyoon Yoo, Meihua Piao, Hyeongju Ryu, Heejin Kim, Young-Ran Yoon, Sook Jin Seong, SeungHwan Lee, Kyung Hwan Kim
{"title":"经批准的可穿戴心电图多中心临床试验的经验教训:问题和实际考虑。","authors":"Ki Young Huh,&nbsp;Sae Im Jeong,&nbsp;Hyounggyoon Yoo,&nbsp;Meihua Piao,&nbsp;Hyeongju Ryu,&nbsp;Heejin Kim,&nbsp;Young-Ran Yoon,&nbsp;Sook Jin Seong,&nbsp;SeungHwan Lee,&nbsp;Kyung Hwan Kim","doi":"10.12793/tcp.2022.30.e7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although wearable electrocardiograms (ECGs) are being increasingly applied in clinical settings, validation methods have not been standardized. As an exploratory evaluation, we performed a multicenter clinical trial implementing an approved wearable patch ECG. Healthy male adults were enrolled in 2 study centers. The approved ECGs were deployed for 6 hours, and pulse rates were measured independently with conventional pulse oximetry at selected time points for correlation analyses. The transmission status of the data was evaluated by heart rates and classified into valid, invalid, and missing. A total of 55 subjects (40 in center 1 and 15 in center 2) completed the study. Overall, 77.40% of heart rates were within the valid range. Invalid and missing data accounted for 1.42% and 21.23%, respectively. There were significant differences in valid and missing data between centers. The proportion of missing data in center 1 (24.77%) was more than twice center 2 (11.77%). Heart rates measured by the wearable ECG and conventional pulse oximetry showed a poor correlation (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.0454). In conclusion, we evaluated the multicenter feasibility of implementing wearable ECGs. The results suggest that systems to mitigate multicenter discrepancies and remove artifacts should be implemented prior to performing a clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05182684.</p>","PeriodicalId":23288,"journal":{"name":"Translational and Clinical Pharmacology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f9/91/tcp-30-87.PMC9253449.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lessons from a multicenter clinical trial with an approved wearable electrocardiogram: issues and practical considerations.\",\"authors\":\"Ki Young Huh,&nbsp;Sae Im Jeong,&nbsp;Hyounggyoon Yoo,&nbsp;Meihua Piao,&nbsp;Hyeongju Ryu,&nbsp;Heejin Kim,&nbsp;Young-Ran Yoon,&nbsp;Sook Jin Seong,&nbsp;SeungHwan Lee,&nbsp;Kyung Hwan Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.12793/tcp.2022.30.e7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Although wearable electrocardiograms (ECGs) are being increasingly applied in clinical settings, validation methods have not been standardized. As an exploratory evaluation, we performed a multicenter clinical trial implementing an approved wearable patch ECG. Healthy male adults were enrolled in 2 study centers. The approved ECGs were deployed for 6 hours, and pulse rates were measured independently with conventional pulse oximetry at selected time points for correlation analyses. The transmission status of the data was evaluated by heart rates and classified into valid, invalid, and missing. A total of 55 subjects (40 in center 1 and 15 in center 2) completed the study. Overall, 77.40% of heart rates were within the valid range. Invalid and missing data accounted for 1.42% and 21.23%, respectively. There were significant differences in valid and missing data between centers. The proportion of missing data in center 1 (24.77%) was more than twice center 2 (11.77%). Heart rates measured by the wearable ECG and conventional pulse oximetry showed a poor correlation (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.0454). In conclusion, we evaluated the multicenter feasibility of implementing wearable ECGs. The results suggest that systems to mitigate multicenter discrepancies and remove artifacts should be implemented prior to performing a clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05182684.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23288,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational and Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f9/91/tcp-30-87.PMC9253449.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational and Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12793/tcp.2022.30.e7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/5/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational and Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12793/tcp.2022.30.e7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/5/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

尽管可穿戴式心电图(ECGs)在临床环境中的应用越来越多,但验证方法尚未标准化。作为一项探索性评估,我们进行了一项多中心临床试验,实施了一种经批准的可穿戴贴片心电图。健康成年男性被纳入2个研究中心。经批准的心电图放置6小时,在选定的时间点用常规脉搏血氧仪独立测量脉搏率,进行相关性分析。通过心率评估数据传输状态,并将其分为有效、无效和缺失。共有55名受试者(中心1 40名,中心2 15名)完成了研究。总体而言,77.40%的心率在有效范围内。无效数据和缺失数据分别占1.42%和21.23%。中心间有效资料与缺失资料差异有统计学意义。中心1缺失数据比例(24.77%)大于中心2(11.77%)。可穿戴心电图心率与常规脉搏血氧仪心率相关性较差(类内相关系数= 0.0454)。总之,我们评估了实施可穿戴心电图的多中心可行性。结果表明,在进行临床试验之前,应该实施减轻多中心差异和去除伪影的系统。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT05182684。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Lessons from a multicenter clinical trial with an approved wearable electrocardiogram: issues and practical considerations.

Lessons from a multicenter clinical trial with an approved wearable electrocardiogram: issues and practical considerations.

Lessons from a multicenter clinical trial with an approved wearable electrocardiogram: issues and practical considerations.

Lessons from a multicenter clinical trial with an approved wearable electrocardiogram: issues and practical considerations.

Although wearable electrocardiograms (ECGs) are being increasingly applied in clinical settings, validation methods have not been standardized. As an exploratory evaluation, we performed a multicenter clinical trial implementing an approved wearable patch ECG. Healthy male adults were enrolled in 2 study centers. The approved ECGs were deployed for 6 hours, and pulse rates were measured independently with conventional pulse oximetry at selected time points for correlation analyses. The transmission status of the data was evaluated by heart rates and classified into valid, invalid, and missing. A total of 55 subjects (40 in center 1 and 15 in center 2) completed the study. Overall, 77.40% of heart rates were within the valid range. Invalid and missing data accounted for 1.42% and 21.23%, respectively. There were significant differences in valid and missing data between centers. The proportion of missing data in center 1 (24.77%) was more than twice center 2 (11.77%). Heart rates measured by the wearable ECG and conventional pulse oximetry showed a poor correlation (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.0454). In conclusion, we evaluated the multicenter feasibility of implementing wearable ECGs. The results suggest that systems to mitigate multicenter discrepancies and remove artifacts should be implemented prior to performing a clinical trial.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05182684.

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
Translational and Clinical Pharmacology
Translational and Clinical Pharmacology Medicine-Pharmacology (medical)
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Translational and Clinical Pharmacology (Transl Clin Pharmacol, TCP) is the official journal of the Korean Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (KSCPT). TCP is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to the dissemination of knowledge relating to all aspects of translational and clinical pharmacology. The categories for publication include pharmacokinetics (PK) and drug disposition, drug metabolism, pharmacodynamics (PD), clinical trials and design issues, pharmacogenomics and pharmacogenetics, pharmacometrics, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacovigilence, and human pharmacology. Studies involving animal models, pharmacological characterization, and clinical trials are appropriate for consideration.
×
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