TY - JOUR
T1 - Ambulatory ECG monitoring for syncope and collapse in United States, Europe, and Japan
T2 - The patients’ viewpoint
AU - Altinsoy, Meltem
AU - Sutton, Richard
AU - Kohno, Ritsuko
AU - Sakaguchi, Scott
AU - Mears, Robin K.
AU - Benditt, David G.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Heart Rhythm Society
PY - 2021/8
Y1 - 2021/8
N2 - Background: Practice guidelines provide clinicians direction for the selection of ambulatory ECG (AECG) monitors in the evaluation of syncope/collapse. However, whether patients’ understand differences among AECG systems is unknown. Methods and Results: A survey was conducted of USA (n = 99), United Kingdom (UK)/Germany (D) (n = 75) and Japan (n = 40) syncope/collapse patients who underwent diagnostic AECG monitoring. Responses were quantitated using a Likert-like 7-point scale (mean ± SD) or percent of patients indicating a Top 2 box (T2B) for a particular AECG attribute. Patient ages and diagnosed etiologies of syncope/collapse were similar across geographies. Patients were queried on AECG attributes including the ability to detect arrhythmic/cardiac causes of collapse, instructions received, ease of use, and cost. Patient perception of the diagnostic capabilities and ease of use did not differ significantly among the AECG technologies; however, USA patients had a more favorable overall view of ICM/ILRs (T2B: 42.4%) than did UK/D (T2B: 28%) or Japan (T2B: 17.5%) patients. Similarly, US patient rankings for education received regarding device choice and operation tended to be higher than UK/D or Japan patients; nevertheless, at their best, the Likert scores were low (approximately 4.7-6.0) suggesting need for education improvement. Finally, both US and UK/D patients were similarly concerned with ICM costs (T2B, 31% vs 20% for Japan). Conclusions: Patients across several geographies have a similar but imperfect understanding of AECG technologies. Given more detailed education the patient is likely to be a more effective partner with the clinician in establishing a potential symptom-arrhythmia correlation.
AB - Background: Practice guidelines provide clinicians direction for the selection of ambulatory ECG (AECG) monitors in the evaluation of syncope/collapse. However, whether patients’ understand differences among AECG systems is unknown. Methods and Results: A survey was conducted of USA (n = 99), United Kingdom (UK)/Germany (D) (n = 75) and Japan (n = 40) syncope/collapse patients who underwent diagnostic AECG monitoring. Responses were quantitated using a Likert-like 7-point scale (mean ± SD) or percent of patients indicating a Top 2 box (T2B) for a particular AECG attribute. Patient ages and diagnosed etiologies of syncope/collapse were similar across geographies. Patients were queried on AECG attributes including the ability to detect arrhythmic/cardiac causes of collapse, instructions received, ease of use, and cost. Patient perception of the diagnostic capabilities and ease of use did not differ significantly among the AECG technologies; however, USA patients had a more favorable overall view of ICM/ILRs (T2B: 42.4%) than did UK/D (T2B: 28%) or Japan (T2B: 17.5%) patients. Similarly, US patient rankings for education received regarding device choice and operation tended to be higher than UK/D or Japan patients; nevertheless, at their best, the Likert scores were low (approximately 4.7-6.0) suggesting need for education improvement. Finally, both US and UK/D patients were similarly concerned with ICM costs (T2B, 31% vs 20% for Japan). Conclusions: Patients across several geographies have a similar but imperfect understanding of AECG technologies. Given more detailed education the patient is likely to be a more effective partner with the clinician in establishing a potential symptom-arrhythmia correlation.
KW - ambulatory ECG monitoring
KW - insertable cardiac monitors
KW - syncope
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85106282418&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85106282418&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/joa3.12560
DO - 10.1002/joa3.12560
M3 - Article
C2 - 34386128
AN - SCOPUS:85106282418
SN - 1880-4276
VL - 37
SP - 1023
EP - 1030
JO - Journal of Arrhythmia
JF - Journal of Arrhythmia
IS - 4
ER -