No abstract

AimsSudden cardiac death (SCD) is among the most common causes of death in western countries including Germany. Whereas risk stratification and primary prevention is still insufficient, we also lack accurate incidence estimates. Current estimates vary widely (18.6–128/100 000/year), but data on SCD incidence in Germany are missing. Depending on SCD definitions, death needs to occur between 1 and 24 h after the onset of symptoms.Methods and resultsIn the district of Aurich (190 000 inhabitants, Lower Saxony, Germany), emergency medical service (EMS) is provided by a district government operated single carrier and two hospitals. To evaluate all EMS calls in this district from 2002 to 2009, we obtained EMS protocols, medical records, and death certificates for data analysis and adjudication of SCD. We defined SCD according to the definition of the World Health Organization, considering patients with cardiac arrest within ≤1 h after the onset of symptoms. We also required cardiopulmonary resuscitation being performed by EMS personnel.The overall mortality rate in the district of Aurich (1060/100 000/year) corresponded well with the average mortality rate in Germany (1030/100 000/year). During the observation period, we adjudicated 1212 SCD cases, equivalent to an annual rate of 151 SCD cases (81 cases/100 000/year). Rates remained remarkably stable over time, and affected a considerable number of individuals of working age (32/100 000/year).ConclusionConsistent with prior reports, the SCD incidence in a district of Germany is substantial. Despite an elaborate EMS system and advanced medical care, SCD rates remain stable and necessitate improved, individualized risk stratification.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Impact of telemedicine with remote patient monitoring (RPM) in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients on clinical outcomes has been investigated in various clinical settings with divergent results. However, role of RPM on patient-reported-outcomes (PRO) is unclear. The INFRARED-ICD trial aimed to investigate the effect of RPM in addition to standard-of-care on PRO in a mixed ICD patient cohort. Methods and results Patients were randomized to RPM (n = 92) or standard in-office-FU (n = 88) serving as control group (CTL). At baseline and on a monthly basis over 1 year, study participants completed the EQ-5D questionnaire for the primary outcome Quality of Life (QoL), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Florida Patient Acceptance Survey questionnaire for secondary outcomes. Demographic characteristics (82% men, mean age 62.3 years) and PRO at baseline were not different between RPM and CTL. Primary outcome analysis showed that additional RPM was not superior to CTL with respect to QoL over 12 months [+ 1.2 vs. + 3.9 points in CTL and RPM group, respectively (p = 0.24)]. Pre-specified analyses could not identify subgroups with improved QoL by the use of RPM. Neither levels of anxiety (− 0.4 vs. − 0.3, p = 0.88), depression (+ 0.3 vs. ± 0.0, p = 0.38), nor device acceptance (+ 1.1 vs. + 1.6, p = 0.20) were influenced by additional use of RPM. Conclusion The results of the present study show that PRO were not improved by RPM in addition to standard-of-care FU. Careful evaluation and planning of future trials in selected ICD patients are warranted before implementing RPM in routine practice.