HRS white paper on clinical utilization of digital health technology.

This collaborative statement from the Digital Health Committee of the Heart Rhythm Society provides everyday clinical scenarios in which wearables may be utilized by patients for cardiovascular health and arrhythmia management. We describe herein the spectrum of wearables that are commercially available for patients, and their benefits, shortcomings and areas for technological improvement. Although wearables for rhythm diagnosis and management have not been examined in large randomized clinical trials, undoubtedly the usage of wearables has quickly escalated in clinical practice. This document is the first of a planned series in which we will update information on wearables as they are revised and released to consumers

Multi-centre randomised controlled trial of a smart phone-based event recorder alongside standard care versus standard care for patients presenting to the Emergency Department with palpitations and pre-syncope - the IPED (Investigation of Palpitations in the ED) study:study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Abstract Background Palpitations and pre-syncope are together responsible for 300,000 annual Emergency Department (ED) attendances in the United Kingdom (UK). Diagnosis of the underlying rhythm is difficult as many patients are fully recovered on ED arrival; and examination and presenting electrocardiogram (ECG) are commonly normal. The only way to establish the underlying heart rhythm is to capture an ECG during symptoms. Recent technology advances have led to several novel ECG monitoring devices appearing on the market. This trial aims to compare the symptomatic rhythm detection rate at 90 days of one such smart phone-based event recorder (AliveCor Heart Monitor and AliveECG) with standard care for participants presenting to the ED with palpitations and pre-syncope and no obvious cause in the ED. Methods/Design This is a multi-centre hospital ED / Acute Medical Unit (AMU) open label, randomised controlled trial. Participants will be recruited in 10 tertiary and district general hospitals in the UK. Participants aged ≥ 16 years presenting with an episode of palpitations or pre-syncope with no obvious cause and whose underlying ECG rhythm during these episodes remains undiagnosed after clinical assessment will be included. Participants will be randomised to either: (1) the intervention arm, standard care plus the use of a smart phone-based event recorder; or (2) the control arm, standard care. Primary endpoint will be symptomatic rhythm detection rate at 90 days. A number of secondary clinical, process and cost-effectiveness endpoints will be collected and analysed. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis. Discussion The Investigation of Palpitations in the ED (IPED) study aims to recruit 242 participants across 10 hospital sites. It will be the first study to investigate the ability of a smart phone-based event recorder to detect symptomatic cardiac rhythms compared to standard care for ED patients with palpitations and pre-syncope with no obvious cause in the ED. This smart phone event recorder will allow ED patients who have presented with palpitations or pre-syncope to record their ECG tracing if they have a further episode and may increase the rate of underlying rhythm diagnosis. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02783898. Registered on 26 May 2016

Survey of current perspectives on consumer-available digital health devices for detecting atrial fibrillation.

Background: Many digital health technologies capable of atrial fibrillation (AF) detection are directly available to patients. However, adaptation into clinical practice by heart rhythm healthcare practitioners (HCPs) is unclear. Objective: To examine HCP perspectives on use of commercial technologies for AF detection and management. Methods: We created an electronic survey for HCPs assessing practice demographics and perspectives on digital devices for AF detection and management. The survey was distributed electronically to all members of 3 heart rhythm professional societies. Results: We received 1601 responses out of 73,563 e-mails sent, with 43.6% from cardiac electrophysiologists, 12.8% from fellows, and 11.6% from advanced practice practitioners. Most respondents (62.3%) reported having recommended patient use of a digital device for AF detection. Those who did not had concerns about their accuracy (29.6%), clinical utility of results (22.8%), and integration into electronic health records (19.8%). Results from a 30-second single-lead electrocardiogram were sufficient for 42.7% of HCPs to recommend oral anticoagulation for patients at high risk for stroke. Respondents wanted more data comparing the accuracy of digital devices to conventional devices for AF monitoring (64.9%). A quarter (27.3%) of HCPs had no reservations recommending digital devices for AF detection, and most (53.4%) wanted guidelines from their professional societies providing guidance on their optimal use. Conclusion: Many HCPs have already integrated digital devices into their clinical practice. However, HCPs reported facing challenges when using digital technologies for AF detection, and professional society recommendations on their use are needed