The field of cardiology has long used wearable medical devices to monitor heart rate and rhythm. The past decade has seen the emergence of many new wearable devices, including several that have been widely adopted by both physicians and consumers. In this review, we discuss existing and forthcoming devices designed to measure activity, heart rate, heart rhythm, and thoracic fluid. We also offer several frameworks to classify and better understand wearable devices, such that we may weigh their potential benefit in improving healthcare with the many challenges that must be addressed to reap these benefits.
Heart failure (HF) affects approximately 5.1 million adults in the USA, with expectations of a rise to nearly 8 million adults by 2030. Patients with HF are at increased risk for morbidity/mortality, and comorbidities can further complicate care for these patients. Diabetes mellitus, chronic pain, arrhythmias, and depression are diagnoses that often coexist with HF. Medications commonly used to treat these comorbidities may induce or worsen HF symptoms, so determining appropriate drug therapy is important. Healthcare providers must understand the relationship between these medications and HF in order to improve prescribing practices to increase patient safety and reduce morbidity and mortality. This manuscript discusses the association between certain medications used to treat the aforementioned diagnoses and their relationship to HF. The purpose of this article is to provide guidance on which pharmacologic options require special consideration, increased monitoring, or complete avoidance in HF patients with diabetes mellitus, chronic pain, arrhythmias, and/or depression.
Background
Coagulopathy associated with COVID-19 infection and venous thromboembolism (VTE) have emerged as significant contributors to morbidity among patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.
Objective
We performed a systematic review to estimate VTE incidence in hospitalized patients and to analyze characteristic factors in the VTE cohort.
Methods
We searched PubMed and Google Scholar using specified title search terms “SARS-CoV-2” or “COVID-19” and “venous thromboembolism” and “anticoagulation” among others to identify peer-reviewed journal articles published between June 22, 2019, and June 22, 2020. Data were systematically extracted and synthesized using Microsoft Excel for analysis. The main outcome was VTE incidence, and measures included patient characteristics, anticoagulation, and clinical outcomes with assessment for associations.
Results
In total, 14 studies were included comprising 1677 patients. Most patients (n=1306, 82.4%) received anticoagulation (either VTE prophylaxis or treatment). VTE incidence was 26.9% (SE 3.1; 95% CI 20.8-33.1) and was correlated with systematic screening (r2=0.34, P=.03) and study duration (r2=–0.33, P=.03). D-dimer was higher for the VTE cohort (5.62 [SD 0.9] vs 1.43 [SD 0.6]; P<.001). Odds of VTE were higher at the intensive care unit (odds ratio [OR] 6.38, 95% CI 3.67-11.11; P<.001) but lower with anticoagulation (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.36-0.92; P=.02).
Conclusions
Despite the utilization of background anticoagulation, VTE incidence was historically high. Future studies are needed to provide additional data to guide optimal VTE prophylaxis and diagnostic strategies.
BackgroundDigital wearable devices provide a “real-world” assessment of physical activity and quantify intervention-related changes in clinical trials. However, the value of digital wearable device-recorded physical activity as a clinical trial outcome is unknown.ObjectiveBecause late sodium channel inhibition (ranolazine) improves stress laboratory exercise duration among angina patients, we proposed that this benefit could be quantified and translated during daily life by measuring digital wearable device-determined step count in a clinical trial.MethodsWe conducted a substudy in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of participants with angina and coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) with no obstructive coronary artery disease to evaluate the value of digital wearable device monitoring. Ranolazine or placebo were administered (500-1000 mg twice a day) for 2 weeks with a subsequent 2-week washout followed by crossover to ranolazine or placebo (500-1000 mg twice a day) for an additional 2 weeks. The outcome of interest was within-subject difference in Fitbit Flex daily step count during week 2 of ranolazine versus placebo during each treatment period. Secondary outcomes included within-subject differences in angina, quality of life, myocardial perfusion reserve, and diastolic function.ResultsA total of 43 participants were enrolled in the substudy and 30 successfully completed the substudy for analysis. Overall, late sodium channel inhibition reduced within-subject daily step count versus placebo (mean 5757 [SD 3076] vs mean 6593 [SD 339], P=.01) but did not improve angina (Seattle Angina Questionnaire-7 [SAQ-7]) (P=.83). Among the subgroup with improved angina (SAQ-7), a direct correlation with increased step count (r=.42, P=.02) was observed.ConclusionsWe report one of the first studies to use digital wearable device-determined step count as an outcome variable in a placebo-controlled crossover trial of late sodium channel inhibition in participants with CMD. Our substudy demonstrates that late sodium channel inhibition was associated with a decreased step count overall, although the subgroup with angina improvement had a step count increase. Our findings suggest digital wearable device technology may provide new insights in clinical trial research.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01342029; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01342029 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6uyd6B2PO)
BackgroundImproving the management of patients with complex chronic disease is a substantial undertaking with the simultaneous goals of improving patient outcomes and controlling costs. Reducing avoidable hospitalization for such patients is a step toward both objectives. Some of the deterioration experienced in chronic disease patients occurs outside the view of their clinicians, and before the patient becomes overtly symptomatic. Home monitoring has been used for more than 20 years to detect deterioration earlier so that the patients could be treated before they became ill enough to require hospitalization. Patient participation is an important requirement for successful home monitoring. There has been some concern that patients would be unwilling or unable to engage in a program that collected multiple measurements. The Cedars-Sinai Cardiology Center provides a high-touch, intense management program for patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). A group of their patients were chosen to join a complex, multidevice home monitoring system to see whether such patients would find value in the additional effort.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to determine whether patients already actively engaged in a high-touch intensive management program for CHF would take on the additional burden of a complex home monitoring effort.MethodsA total of 20 patients from the Cedars-Sinai group were enrolled in a monitoring program utilizing 5 different devices. Anonymous surveys were collected from the patients to assess their satisfaction with the program.ResultsIn total, 90% (18/20) completed the program, and 61% (11/20) submitted the survey. Among the 18 patients, overall compliance with the requested measurements was 70%. It was found that 73% (8/11) felt better about their health as a result of the program, whereas another 73% (8/11) believed that the care team now had a better picture of their health.ConclusionsSubstantial patient compliance and satisfaction can be achieved in a sophisticated home monitoring program.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.