Korean Circulation Journal

The Korean Society of Cardiology (대한심장학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Novel Telemonitoring System Using the Single-lead Electrocardiogram Patch With Conventional Telemetry System

  • Soonil Kwon (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Eue-Keun Choi (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • So-Ryoung Lee (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Seil Oh (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Hee-Seok Song (Seers Technology Co.) ;
  • Young-Shin Lee (Seers Technology Co.) ;
  • Sang-Jin Han (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Medical Center) ;
  • Hong Euy Lim (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Medical Center)
  • Received : 2023.08.27
  • Accepted : 2024.01.02
  • Published : 2024.03.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Although a single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) patch may provide advantages for detecting arrhythmias in outpatient settings owing to user convenience, its comparative effectiveness for real-time telemonitoring in inpatient settings remains unclear. We aimed to compare a novel telemonitoring system using a single-lead ECG patch with a conventional telemonitoring system in an inpatient setting. Methods: This was a single-center, prospective cohort study. Patients admitted to the cardiology unit for arrhythmia treatment who required a wireless ECG telemonitoring system were enrolled. A single-lead ECG patch and conventional telemetry were applied simultaneously in hospitalized patients for over 24 hours for real-time telemonitoring. The basic ECG parameters, arrhythmia episodes, and signal loss or noise were compared between the 2 systems. Results: Eighty participants (mean age 62±10 years, 76.3% male) were enrolled. The three most common indications for ECG telemonitoring were atrial fibrillation (66.3%), sick sinus syndrome (12.5%), and atrioventricular block (10.0%). The intra-class correlation coefficients for detecting the number of total beats, atrial and ventricular premature complexes, maximal, average, and minimal heart rates, and pauses were all over 0.9 with p values for reliability <0.001. Compared to a conventional system, a novel system demonstrated significantly lower signal noise (median 0.3% [0.1-1.6%] vs. 2.4% [1.4-3.7%], p<0.001) and fewer episodes of signal loss (median 22 [2-53] vs. 64 [22-112] episodes, p=0.002). Conclusions: The novel telemonitoring system using a single-lead ECG patch offers performance comparable to that of a conventional system while significantly reducing signal loss and noise.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Hallym University Medical Center (HALLYM 2021-08-010-006). This research was supported by a grant from the Korea Medical Device Development Fund grant funded by the Korea government (the Ministry of Science and ICT, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, the Ministry of Health & Welfare, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety) (project number: HI20C1662, 1711138358, KMDF_PR_20200901_0173).

References

  1. Drew BJ, Califf RM, Funk M, et al. Practice standards for electrocardiographic monitoring in hospital settings: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Councils on Cardiovascular Nursing, Clinical Cardiology, and Cardiovascular Disease in the Young: endorsed by the International Society of Computerized Electrocardiology and the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses. Circulation 2004;110:2721-46.
  2. Sandau KE, Funk M, Auerbach A, et al. Update to practice standards for electrocardiographic monitoring in hospital settings: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2017;136:e273-344.
  3. Sandroni C, Nolan J, Cavallaro F, Antonelli M. In-hospital cardiac arrest: incidence, prognosis and possible measures to improve survival. Intensive Care Med 2007;33:237-45.
  4. Svennberg E, Tjong F, Goette A, et al. How to use digital devices to detect and manage arrhythmias: an EHRA practical guide. Europace 2022;24:979-1005.
  5. Sandberg EL, Halvorsen S, Berge T, et al. Fully digital self-screening for atrial fibrillation with patch electrocardiogram. Europace 2023;25:euad075.
  6. Manninger M, Zweiker D, Svennberg E, et al. Current perspectives on wearable rhythm recordings for clinical decision-making: the wEHRAbles 2 survey. Europace 2021;23:1106-13.
  7. Kwon S, Lee SR, Choi EK, et al. Comparison between the 24-hour Holter test and 72-hour single-lead electrocardiogram monitoring with an adhesive patch-type device for atrial fibrillation detection: prospective cohort study. J Med Internet Res 2022;24:e37970.
  8. Barrett PM, Komatireddy R, Haaser S, et al. Comparison of 24-hour Holter monitoring with 14-day novel adhesive patch electrocardiographic monitoring. Am J Med 2014;127:95.e11-7.
  9. Liu CM, Chang SL, Yeh YH, et al. Enhanced detection of cardiac arrhythmias utilizing 14-day continuous ECG patch monitoring. Int J Cardiol 2021;332:78-84.
  10. Kim JY, Oh IY, Lee H, et al. The efficacy of detecting arrhythmia is higher with 7-day continuous electrocardiographic patch monitoring than with 24-h Holter monitoring. J Arrhythm 2023;39:422-9.
  11. Bouzid Z, Al-Zaiti SS, Bond R, Sejdic E. Remote and wearable ECG devices with diagnostic abilities in adults: a state-of-the-science scoping review. Heart Rhythm 2022;19:1192-201.
  12. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-10.
  13. Bansal A, Joshi R. Portable out-of-hospital electrocardiography: a review of current technologies. J Arrhythm 2018;34:129-38.
  14. Al-Alusi MA, Ding E, McManus DD, Lubitz SA. Wearing your heart on your sleeve: the future of cardiac rhythm monitoring. Curr Cardiol Rep 2019;21:158.
  15. Leclercq C, Witt H, Hindricks G, et al. Wearables, telemedicine, and artificial intelligence in arrhythmias and heart failure: proceedings of the European Society of Cardiology Cardiovascular Round Table. Europace 2022;24:1372-83.
  16. Pevnick JM, Birkeland K, Zimmer R, Elad Y, Kedan I. Wearable technology for cardiology: an update and framework for the future. Trends Cardiovasc Med 2018;28:144-50.
  17. Ackermans PA, Solosko TA, Spencer EC, et al. A user-friendly integrated monitor-adhesive patch for long-term ambulatory electrocardiogram monitoring. J Electrocardiol 2012;45:148-53.
  18. Ramkumar S, Nerlekar N, D'Souza D, Pol DJ, Kalman JM, Marwick TH. Atrial fibrillation detection using single lead portable electrocardiographic monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2018;8:e024178.
  19. Kwon S, Lee SR, Choi EK, et al. Validation of adhesive single-lead ECG device compared with Holter monitoring among non-atrial fibrillation patients. Sensors (Basel) 2021;21:3122.