Heart rhythm O2 · 2026
Recommendations for sharing cardiovascular implantable electronic device data with patients based on clinician interviews.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Daley Carly, Shirazi Jonathan, Allmandinger Tina, Flanagan Mindy, Pruitt Stephanie, Lin Hung-Yeh, Cornet Victor P, Carroll Jeanne, Tan Yi Rong, Toscos Tammy, Mirro Michael
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) capture an abundance of data that requires specific medical knowledge to interpret. Currently, there are no clear recommendations for sharing clinically meaningful CIED data with patients from the abundance of data in CIED remote monitoring reports.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to explore clinicians' perceptions of clinical care gaps related to CIED data that could be improved through patient access to data and to generate recommendations for sharing CIED data with patients.
METHODS: In this institutional review board-exempt, 2-phase sequential qualitative study, 42 semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 32 clinicians in the United States who specialize in the care of patients with CIEDs. Phase 1 explored clinical care gaps related to CIED data, and phase 2 involved questions about sharing CIED data with patients in 3 device-specific scenarios.
RESULTS: Clinicians identified mechanisms by which sharing data with patients could close gaps in care, for example, improving timeliness of anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation. However, clinicians expressed concerns about sharing data as well as beliefs that it would not alter patient care.
CONCLUSION: Based on clinician interviews, patient access to data from CIED reports has potential to improve care. Recommendations synthesized from the findings included displaying battery status and presence/absence of episodes and therapies and providing reassurance that the device is delivering therapies appropriately. Shared decision-making processes before device implantation and during ongoing care should include options for sharing CIED data with patients and discussion of potential benefits to understand patients' needs and preferences.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to explore clinicians' perceptions of clinical care gaps related to CIED data that could be improved through patient access to data and to generate recommendations for sharing CIED data with patients.
METHODS: In this institutional review board-exempt, 2-phase sequential qualitative study, 42 semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 32 clinicians in the United States who specialize in the care of patients with CIEDs. Phase 1 explored clinical care gaps related to CIED data, and phase 2 involved questions about sharing CIED data with patients in 3 device-specific scenarios.
RESULTS: Clinicians identified mechanisms by which sharing data with patients could close gaps in care, for example, improving timeliness of anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation. However, clinicians expressed concerns about sharing data as well as beliefs that it would not alter patient care.
CONCLUSION: Based on clinician interviews, patient access to data from CIED reports has potential to improve care. Recommendations synthesized from the findings included displaying battery status and presence/absence of episodes and therapies and providing reassurance that the device is delivering therapies appropriately. Shared decision-making processes before device implantation and during ongoing care should include options for sharing CIED data with patients and discussion of potential benefits to understand patients' needs and preferences.