Remote support during cardiac implantable electrical device follow-up: preliminary experience in clinical practice

Abstract

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Industry employed allied professionals (IEAPs) traditionally provide technical assistance to physicians during cardiac implantable electrical device (CIED) implantation, programming, troubleshooting, and follow-up, by operating the programmers under the supervision of the physician. The Heart Connect™ application is a data-sharing system intended to provide physicians with the means to establish an online meeting and share the display of the LATITUDE™ Programmer (Boston Scientific) with IEAPs in a remote location. Purpose We describe the preliminary experience of remote IEAP support during CIED follow-up in clinical practice. Methods The Heart Connect™ software was downloaded on the programmer and network connection was established and tested using both Wi-Fi and a 4G cellular adapter at 3 Italian medical centers. External headset and webcam have been connected to the programmer. After system setup, the staff was trained on how to use the application, and online meetings were established with IEAPs of the Remote Clinical Support team during consecutive CIED follow-up visits. Data and users’ feedback were collected on the training provided, the quality of the remote connection, the support at each meeting. Results All the professionals trained in the use of the system judged the information received to be clear and adequate, and felt confident in using the system. Online meetings were established during 34 follow-up visits (12 pacemakers and CRT-P, 13 single- or dual-chamber ICD, 9 CRT-D). The remote connection was successfully established in all cases. In all cases the communication remained stable for the entire duration of the visit, except for 2 cases (connected via 4G) in which a loss of connection occurred (not restored in 1 case). The sound and video quality during two-way communication were rated good or excellent in 31 (91%) cases. The mean duration of the online meeting was 7±3 minutes. Routine CIED checks were performed during the visits: battery status, pacing and sensing thresholds, impedances, current rhythm diagnosis, arrhythmias detected and therapies delivered, device counters and review of programmed parameters, alerts and clinical diagnostics. Programming changes were done during 7 (21%) visits: pacing and sensing parameters, tachycardia detection and therapies. The remote support allowed to successfully complete the visit in 33 (97%) cases, without requiring additional medical or technical support. In all these cases, the support was judged to be equally effective compared to the on-site support, without causing delays or organizational difficulties. Conclusions Remote support during CIED follow-up using Heart Connect™ seems feasible, effective and well accepted. Additional tests are ongoing to demonstrate the potential usefulness of this solution in standard clinical practice, and in the context of restrictions on access to healthcare facilities due to COVID-19 pandemic.