Abstract 287: Vendor-neutral Clinic Management Software Use Is Associated With Time Savings For Remote Monitoring

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliana Biundo ◽  
David Lanctin ◽  
Sarah C Rosemas ◽  
Emmanuelle Nicolle ◽  
Alan Burke
Keyword(s):  
Remote Monitoring ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Staff Time ◽  
Cardiac Device ◽  
Review Time ◽  
Management Software ◽  
Clinic Management ◽  
Remote Transmission ◽  
Cardiac Devices ◽  
Time Savings

Background: As cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) have increased in complexity and sophistication, a transition from in-person follow-up to remote device management has taken place. The amount of information collected via cardiac devices has also increased, making the development of efficient workflows necessary for operational sustainability. Vendor-neutral clinic management software organizes patient, device, and programmer information, and thus has potential to improve remote monitoring workflow and data management. This study sought to examine whether management software use is associated with reduced time to review manage remote transmissions. Methods: A time and motion workflow analysis was performed in 6 U.S. cardiac device clinics, 3 of which use management software (Medtronic Paceart Optima™). Participating sites had an average size of 4,217 (range of 870 to 10,336) CIED patients managed. Each step involved in remote transmission review (including all clinical and administrative tasks, such as chart documentation and billing) was repeatedly timed, for all device models/manufacturers, during one business week (5 days) of observation at each clinic. The time to review an average remote transmission was calculated based on the mean time to perform each step as well as published literature, and stratified by sites with or without management software. Annual staff time required for remote monitoring was modeled by multiplying the average remote transmission review time by the average number of annual transmissions per patient across the 6 sites: 16.1 transmissions/year, representing a weighted average of therapeutic cardiac devices (4.2 transmissions/year) and insertable cardiac monitors (38.9 transmissions/year). Results: A total of 1,290 remote transmission review activities (725 with management software; 565 without management software) were observed and measured during 6 weeks of data collection. On average, the total staff time to review a remote transmission was 2.1 minutes lower at sites with management software (13.6 vs. 11.5 minutes). Extrapolated to the average clinic size of 4,217 patients, this translates into a potential annual time savings of 2,329 hours for sites with management software (13,026 vs. 15,355 hours of total transmission review time). This represents collective time savings across all clinical and administrative staff, and equates to 1.24 annual full-time equivalents (6.9 vs. 8.2 full-time equivalents). Conclusion: Remote monitoring of CIED patients requires significant staff time in cardiac device clinics. Management software is an effective tool in optimizing management of remotely monitored patients, and these benefits may translate into time savings for cardiac device clinics.

scholarly journals Clinic time required to manage remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices: impact of outsourcing initial data review and triage

EP Europace ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Nicolle ◽  
D Lanctin ◽  
S Rosemas ◽  
M De Melis
Keyword(s):  
Initial Data ◽  
Remote Monitoring ◽  
Staff Time ◽  
Clinic Staff ◽  
Remote Transmission ◽  
External Monitoring ◽  
Time Savings ◽  
Monitoring Center ◽  
Time Required ◽  
Monitoring Service

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Medtronic Background Remote monitoring is guideline-recommended to manage cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) patients. With the continuous growth of implanted patients, clinic workload to review transmissions is increasing. Outsourcing initial data review and triage to an external monitoring center could be a valuable option for more efficient allocation of staff time, as high-skilled healthcare professionals can focus on patients in need rather than non-actionable data. Purpose The objective was to estimate the potential clinic staff time saved when outsourcing part of remote transmission review. Methods A previous time and motion evaluation described workflow tasks and time required for remote transmission review (4 EU sites, 674 observations). From real-world experience with a third-party monitoring service, the steps that can be outsourced were determined considering existing clinic-driven protocols for triage and transmission escalation. Staff time required with and without the monitoring service was thus modeled and compared. Results Outsourcing to an external monitoring center can reduce clinic staff time between 77.4% and 84.7% depending on device type. Absolute time savings range from 32.7 to 82.6 hours per year per 100 patients for therapeutic devices, and 301.3 hours for insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) patients, due to the higher frequency of transmissions in diagnostic devices. Conclusion Time to review remote transmissions can become overwhelming for clinics as growing CIED population often outpaces available staffing resources. Outsourcing initial review and triage to an external monitoring center (ensuring quality and regulatory compliance) can be an efficient option to save dedicated staff and facility time for other crucial healthcare activities. Clinic Staff Time Savings Per YearPacemakerICDCRTICMTRANSMISSIONS PER PATIENT PER YEARGreen (no further review required when outsourcing)3.04.35.020.8Yellow/Red (medical action/decision required)0.60.80.93.8ANNUAL STAFF TIME PER PATIENT, minutesNo outsourcing25.346.658.5219.7Outsourcing to monitoring center5.77.78.938.9ANNUAL STAFF TIME PER 100 PATIENTS, hoursNo outsourcing42.277.697.4366.2Outsourcing to monitoring center9.612.914.964.8TIME SAVED PER 100 PATIENTS, hours (%)32.7 (77.4%)64.7 (83.4%)82.6 (84.7%)301.3 (82.3%)Abstract Figure. Outsourcing Remote Transmission Review

Automatic Remote Monitoring of Implantable Cardiac Devices in Clinical Practice – The Lumos-T Safely Reduces Routine Office Device Follow-up (TRUST) Trial

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 87
Author(s):  
Niraj Varma ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Remote Monitoring ◽  
Home Monitoring ◽  
Implantable Devices ◽  
Cardiac Device ◽  
Cardiac Devices ◽  
Enhance Patient Safety ◽  
Implantable Cardiac Devices ◽  
Post Implantation

The use of implantable electronic cardiac devices is increasing. Post-implantation follow-up is important for monitoring both device function and patient condition; however, clinical practice is inconsistent. For example, implantable cardioverter–defibrillator follow-up schedules vary from every three months to yearly according to facility and physician preference and the availability of resources. Importantly, no surveillance occurs between follow-up visits. By contrast, implantable devices with automatic remote monitoring capability provide a means for performing constant surveillance, with the ability to identify salient problems rapidly. The Lumos-T Reduces Routine Office Device Follow-up Study (TRUST) demonstrated that remote home monitoring reduced clinic burden and allowed early detection of patient and/or system problems, enabling efficient monitoring and an opportunity to enhance patient safety. The results of the trial have significant implications for the management of patients receiving all forms of implantable electronic cardiac device.

Abstract 14046: An International Assessment of the Clinic Staff Time Required to Manage Cardiac Device Patients

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliana Biundo ◽  
Juliette Hennion ◽  
Sarah C Rosemas ◽  
David Lanctin ◽  
Emmanuelle Nicolle
Keyword(s):  
Electronic Device ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Clinic Visit ◽  
Staff Time ◽  
Cardiac Device ◽  
Clinic Staff ◽  
Remote Transmission ◽  
Time And Motion ◽  
Time Required

Introduction: Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) patients is guideline-recommended standard of care alongside in-office follow-up. However, overall workload requirements for device management are not well understood, which may hinder implementation of optimal follow-up strategies including remote solutions. This study sought to characterize processes and clinic staff time required for remote and in-person device follow-up of a CIED patient. Methods: A time and motion workflow evaluation was performed in 11 CIED clinics: 6 US; 5 Europe (UK, France, Germany). Participating clinics manage an average of 5,758 (range: 870-22,000) CIED patients. The duration of each CIED management task was repeatedly timed during 1 business week (5 days) of observation at each clinic. All device models/manufacturers were included. Mean staff time for a remote transmission and an in-person clinic visit were calculated, including clinical and administrative tasks. Annual staff time for follow-up of 1 CIED patient was modeled using data on CIED transmission volume, clinical guidelines, and published literature. Results: A total of 276 in-person clinic visits and 2,173 RM activities were observed. Mean staff time required per remote transmission ranged from 9.4-13.5 minutes for therapeutic devices, and 11.3-12.9 mins for insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs), while staff time per in-person visit ranged from 37.8-51.0 mins and 39.9-45.8 mins, respectively (Table 1). The estimated annual time to manage one therapeutic device patient was lower (1.6-2.4 hours) than an ICM patient (7.7-9.3 hours), due to fewer device follow-ups. Conclusions: RM allows for efficient and continuous care as a complement to in-person follow-up. However, overall CIED patient follow-up requires considerable staff time. These data should be considered in addressing barriers to RM adoption, such as challenges in workflow implementation and inconsistent reimbursement.

Mobile health and implantable cardiac devices: Patients' expectations

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 920-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Q Villani ◽  
Andrea Villani ◽  
Alessia Zanni ◽  
Concetta Sticozzi ◽  
Diego Penela Maceda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Remote Monitoring ◽  
Healthy Lifestyle ◽  
Traditional Approach ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Cardiac Device ◽  
Cardiac Devices ◽  
Severe Arrhythmia ◽  
Healthy Lifestyle Promotion ◽  
Implantable Cardiac Device ◽  
Implantable Cardiac Devices

Background Mobile computing and communication technologies in health services and information (so-called mHealth) have modified the traditional approach in the follow-up of patients with implantable cardiac devices, increased patient engagement and empowerment, reduced healthcare costs and improved patients' outcome. Recent developments in mobile technology, with the introduction of smartphone-compatible devices that can measure various health parameters and transfer automatically generated data, have increased the potential application of remote monitoring and the interest towards mHealth. However, little is known about the patients' interest and expectations of this new technology. Objective The patients' interest in the possibility of receiving data from their implantable cardiac device, clinical and health advice via remote monitoring on their smartphones were investigated. Methods A questionnaire entitled ‘Expectations for future possibility of self-management of device data’ (Likert scale scored) was submitted to 300 consecutive implantable cardiac device outpatients. The questionnaire was focused on collecting patients’ expectations in receiving direct information regarding their implantable cardiac device status (item 1, five questions), their own clinical status (item 2, seven questions) and advice on healthy lifestyle promotion (item 3, nine questions). Patient characteristics associated with greater interest towards mHealth were also investigated. Results Questionnaires were completed by 268 patients (221 men, aged 69 ± 14 years). The Cronbach test reported an alpha value of 0.98 for item 1, 0.94 for item 2 and 0.97 for item 3. Patients declared to be mainly interested in the device interventions (62%) and in severe arrhythmia occurrence (61%), followed by data on heart failure severity (54%) and their performed physical activity (48%). Patients showed very little interest in ECG tracing (37%), but the lowest interest was expressed towards healthy lifestyle promotion advice (<40%). A higher education degree and the presence of the caregiver positively affected the interest towards remote monitoring information ( P < 0.001). Conclusions The patients' interests were mainly directed at receiving information related to technical data of the implantable cardiac device and not to the overall management of the disease, underlying the insufficient awareness of patients towards the key role of self-control health status and the promotion of a healthy lifestyle.

scholarly journals Clinic time required to manage cardiac implantable electronic device patients: a time and motion workflow evaluation

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Biundo ◽  
A Burke ◽  
S Rosemas ◽  
D Lanctin ◽  
E Nicolle
Keyword(s):  
Remote Monitoring ◽  
Electronic Device ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Funding Source ◽  
Staff Time ◽  
Private Company ◽  
Remote Transmission ◽  
Time And Motion ◽  
Time Required

Abstract Background The population with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is growing, creating workload for device clinics to manage these patients. However, the CIED follow-up workflow is poorly understood. This study sought to characterize the workflow and staff time for CIED patient management. Methods A time and motion workflow evaluation was performed in 6 U.S. CIED clinics, which manage an average of 4,217 patients. Each task involved in CIED management was repeatedly timed, including all manufacturers, during 1 business week at each clinic. Mean staff time for a remote transmission and an in-person visit were calculated, including all clinical and administrative (e.g: scheduling, documentation) activities related to the encounter. Annual staff time for follow-up of 1 patient was modeled using CIED transmission data for the 6 clinics, guidelines for CIED follow-up, and published literature. Results 124 clinic visits and 1,374 remote monitoring activities were observed. Staff time required per remote transmission ranged from 12.1–13.4 minutes (depending on the CIED type), and time per visit was 43.4–51.0 minutes. Including all remote and in-person follow-ups, the estimated total staff time per year to manage one pacemaker, ICD, CRT, and ICM patient was 2.3, 2.4, 2.4, and 9.3 hours, respectively (Table 1). Conclusion CIED clinic workflow is complex and requires significant staff time. Remote monitoring is an efficient complement to in-office visits, allowing for continuous follow-up of patients. Future research should examine heterogeneity in clinic processes to identify the most efficient workflow. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Medtronic

Abstract 286: Clinic Time Required To Manage Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Patients: A Time And Motion Workflow Evaluation

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliana Biundo ◽  
Alan Burke ◽  
Sarah C Rosemas ◽  
David Lanctin ◽  
Emmanuelle Nicolle
Keyword(s):  
Remote Monitoring ◽  
Patient Management ◽  
Electronic Device ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Staff Time ◽  
Remote Transmission ◽  
Time And Motion ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Time Required

Background: The number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is growing, creating workload for device clinics to manage this population. Remote monitoring of CIED patients is a guidelines-recommended method for optimizing treatment in CIED patients in combination with in-person follow-up. However, the specific steps involved in CIED management, as well as the HCP time required for these activities, are not well understood. The aim of this study was to quantify the clinic staff time requirements associated with the remote and in-person management of CIED patients. Methods: A time and motion workflow evaluation was performed in 6 U.S. CIED clinics. Participating clinics manage an average of 4,217 (range: 870-10,336) CIED patients. The duration of each task involved in CIED management was repeatedly timed, for all device models/manufacturers, during one business week (5 days) of observation at each clinic. Mean time for review of a remote transmission and for an in-person clinic visit were calculated, including all clinical and administrative (e.g., scheduling, documentation) activities related to the encounter. Annual staff time (inclusive of all clinical and administrative staff) for follow-up of 1 CIED patient was modeled using device transmission data for the 6 clinics, clinical guidelines for CIED follow-up, and published literature (Table 1). Results: During 6 total weeks of data collection, 124 in-person clinic visits and 1,374 remote transmission review activities were observed and measured. On average, the total staff time required per remote transmission ranged from 11.9-13.5 minutes (depending on the CIED type), and time per in-person visit ranged from 43.4-51.0 minutes. Including all remote and in-person follow-ups, the estimated total staff time per year to manage one Pacemaker, ICD, CRT, and ICM patient was 2.3, 2.4, 2.4, and 9.3 hours, respectively. Conclusion: CIED patient management workflow is complex and requires significant staff time in cardiac device clinics. Remote monitoring is an efficient complement for in-office visits, allowing for continuous follow-up of patients with reduced staff time required per device check. Future research should examine heterogeneity in patient management processes to identify the most efficient workflow.

Clinic Time Required for Remote and In-person Management of Cardiac Device Patients: A Time and Motion Workflow Evaluation (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lanctin ◽  
Eliana Biundo ◽  
Marco Di Bacco ◽  
Sarah Rosemas ◽  
Emmanuelle Nicolle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Management ◽  
Clinic Visit ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Staff Time ◽  
Cardiac Device ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices ◽  
Time And Motion ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Time Requirements ◽  
Time Required

BACKGROUND The number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is growing, creating substantial workload for device clinics. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to characterize the workflow and quantify clinic staff time requirements to manage CIED patients. METHODS A time and motion workflow evaluation was performed in 11 US and European CIED clinics. Workflow tasks were repeatedly timed during one business week of observation at each clinic. Observations were inclusive of all device models/manufacturers present. Mean cumulative staff time required to review a Remote device transmission and for an In-person clinic visit were calculated, including all necessary clinical and administrative tasks. Annual staff time for follow-up of 1 CIED patient was modeled using CIED transmission volumes, clinical guidelines, and published literature. RESULTS A total of 276 in-person clinic visits and 2,173 remote monitoring activities were observed. Mean staff time required per remote transmission ranged from 9.4-13.5 minutes for therapeutic devices (pacemaker, ICD, CRT) and 11.3-12.9 mins for diagnostic devices (insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs)). Mean staff time per in-person visit ranged from 37.8-51.0 mins and 39.9-45.8 mins, for therapeutic devices and ICMs respectively. Including all remote and in-person follow-ups, the estimated annual time to manage one CIED patient ranged from 1.6-2.4 hours for therapeutic devices and 7.7-9.3 hours for ICMs. CONCLUSIONS CIED patient management workflow is complex and requires significant staff time. Understanding process steps and time requirements informs implementation of efficiency improvements, including remote solutions. Future research should examine the heterogeneity in patient management processes to identify the most efficient workflows.

scholarly journals Experience with the use of microbiological analyzer BactoSCREEN in a routine practice of clinical microbiology laboratory

2020 ◽  
pp. 221-230
Author(s):  
Svetlana A. Gordeeva ◽  
A.Yu. Zolotarev ◽  
M.G. Movsisyan ◽  
A.V. Rozinko
Keyword(s):  
Species Identification ◽  
Clinical Microbiology ◽  
Objective Assessment ◽  
Maldi Ms ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Clinical Microbiology Laboratory ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Microbiology Laboratory ◽  
Staff Time ◽  
Wide Range

Objective. Assessment of bacterial identification effectiveness in clinical microbiology laboratory using the MALDI-MS based system BactoSCREEN. Materials and Methods. Bacteriological testing was done by the cultivation on Сolumbia agar with 5% of sheep blood (at 37°C for 24 hours). Colonies for identification were selected based on their growth pattern, type of hemolysis, morphology and consistency. The species identification was done by the MALDI-MS using the microbiology analyzer BactoSCREEN. Apart from MALDI-MS, we used morphology and biochemical methods for species identification when necessary. Serological tests were used for serovar and biovar identifications. Results. A total of 85945 bacterial identifications was performed in 2018. When compared to 2017, the throughput of the laboratory increased ten times. A total of 23252 isolates were obtained in the previously mentioned period. A single identification took 2.98–13.22 minutes including time for supporting procedures, whereas the staff time for one identification itself constituted an average of 1.55 minutes. When compared to manual methods, introduction of mass-spectrometry allowed us to achieve 3.5-fold decrease of the staff time in the average. Therefore, annual labor saving in terms of staffing corresponds to 11 full-time positions. Conclusions. In view of high throughput, analysis speed, simplicity and low cost of sample preparation, MALDI-MS identification fits well into the practice of clinical microbiology laboratory, especially when large-scale screening studies of bacterial cultures are required. The use of MALDI-MS is likely to be most promising when carrying out microbiological monitoring that is traditionally associated with large number of samples and wide range of microorganisms detected.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document