Remote Symptom Review in Patients With Implantable Diagnostic Holter (BIOMONI-DIG)
Efficiency of a Clinical Process Based on Remote Review of Symptoms in Patients With an Implantable Diagnostic Holter.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Population of patients: Patients over 18 years old who require the implantation of an implantable diagnostic holter due to indications of syncope or atrial fibrillation, and who are willing to use an application installed on their phone to telematically send clinical symptoms that may occur during the active study period.
Design: Clinical, randomized, prospective, single-center study.
Investigational Device: BIOMONITOR III implantable cardiac holter and successive models with HOMEMONITORING remote monitoring system for constant monitoring of patient's cardiac signals. Installation of the Patient APP on the patient's phone for symptom transmission.
Overall Objective: To study the clinical and organizational benefit of implementing a methodology for monitoring patients receiving an implantable diagnostic BIOMONITOR III holter and successive models, consisting of remote review of alerts sent by the device via the HOME MONITORING remote monitoring platform and the transmission of relevant patient symptoms through the use of a specific application installable on the patient's phone. The efficiency of this methodology will be compared with a control group consisting of monitoring through the usual clinical practice of the hospital.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Andres Iñiguez Romo, MD, PhD
- Phone Number: +34986825564
- Email: andres.iniguez.romo@sergas.es
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Elvis Teijeira Fernández, MD, PhD
- Phone Number: +34986825564
- Email: elvis.teijeira.fernandez@sergas.es
Study Locations
-
-
-
Vigo, Spain, 36211
- Recruiting
- Hospital Alvaro Cunqueiro
-
Contact:
- Pablo Juan Salvadores, MPH,PhD
- Phone Number: +34986825564
- Email: pablo.juan@iisgaliciasur.es
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients indicated for implantation of a subcutaneous implantable holter due to syncope or cryptogenic stroke (atrial fibrillation detection)
- Patients over 18 years old.
- Patients who consent to the installation of a patient application for telematic submission of patient-related symptoms.
- Patients capable of using the patient application.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients over 80 years of age or, failing that, not able to use an application to send their symptoms.
- Life expectancy of less than 12 months for any reason.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Homemonitoring + APP
The patients receive the usual standard treatment with remote holter monitoring along with an app for the notification of adverse events.
|
The patients will download an app through which they will be able to report adverse events related to their cardiovascular health.
|
|
No Intervention: Homemonitoring
The patients receive the usual standard treatment with remote holter monitoring
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
TIME FRAME
Time Frame: one year
|
Time from the first alert by Home Monitoring of the implantable holter to the clinical diagnosis according to the patient's clinical indication.
|
one year
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Number of in-person visits in each group
Time Frame: one year
|
Number of in-person visits in each group
|
one year
|
|
Incidence remote transmissions activated by patient indication
Time Frame: one year
|
Number of remote transmissions activated by patient indication
|
one year
|
|
Rate of false positives
Time Frame: one year
|
Number of false positives, according to physician's diagnosis.
|
one year
|
|
Rate of symptoms sent by the patient
Time Frame: one year
|
Number of false positives (according to physician's diagnosis)
|
one year
|
|
Rate of symptoms sent by the patient that correspond to remote alerts sent by the patient
Time Frame: one year
|
Rate of symptoms sent by the patient that correspond to remote alerts sent by the patient (e.g., the symptom corresponds to a detected arrhythmia)
|
one year
|
|
Rate of symptoms not corresponding to detected arrhythmias
Time Frame: one year
|
Rate of symptoms not corresponding to detected arrhythmias(e.g., the symptom corresponds to a detected arrhythmia)
|
one year
|
|
Number of new non-cardiac clinical diagnoses discovered thanks to the symptoms sent by the patient.
Time Frame: one year
|
Number of new non-cardiac clinical diagnoses discovered thanks to the symptoms sent by the patient.corresponds to a detected arrhythmia
|
one year
|
|
Qualitative Patient Objectives
Time Frame: one year
|
Measured through a satisfaction survey on the use or non-use of the patient application to telematically send their symptoms
|
one year
|
|
Efficacy of implementing a clinical process based on remote monitoring of patient symptoms
Time Frame: one year
|
Change in patient interaction with the physician - fewer calls/visits to the hospital.
|
one year
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Investigators
Investigators
- Study Chair: Andrés Iñiguez Romo, MD, phD, Servicio Galego de Saude
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Gupta N, Yang J, Reynolds K, Lenane J, Garcia E, Sung SH, Harrison TN, Solomon MD, Go AS; KP-RHYTHM Study Group. Diagnostic Yield, Outcomes, and Resource Utilization With Different Ambulatory Electrocardiographic Monitoring Strategies. Am J Cardiol. 2022 Mar 1;166:38-44. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2021.11.027. Epub 2021 Dec 23.
- Sharma AN, Baranchuk A. Ambulatory External Electrocardiography Monitoring: Holter, Extended Holter, Mobile Cardiac Telemetry Monitoring. Card Electrophysiol Clin. 2021 Sep;13(3):427-438. doi: 10.1016/j.ccep.2021.04.003. Epub 2021 Jul 8.
- Varma N, Epstein AE, Schweikert R, Michalski J, Love CJ; TRUST Investigators. Role of Automatic Wireless Remote Monitoring Immediately Following ICD Implant: The Lumos-T Reduces Routine Office Device Follow-Up Study (TRUST) Trial. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016 Mar;27(3):321-6. doi: 10.1111/jce.12895. Epub 2016 Jan 27.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- FF088
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.