Comprehensive vs. Standard Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Devices in Heart Failure Patients
Study Overview
The ECOST-CRT study aimed to improve care for heart failure (HF) patients by comparing two types of remote monitoring (RM) for those with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices.
Study Design
Patients were divided into two groups:
- Control Group: Standard daily RM, focusing on technical parameters and arrhythmias.
- Active Group: Comprehensive RM, which included a monthly symptom questionnaire and additional notifications about heart activity.
The main goal was to see if comprehensive RM could reduce all-cause mortality or hospitalizations due to worsening heart failure.
Results
A total of 652 patients participated, with an average age of 70.4 years. The study was cut short due to the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in an average follow-up of 18 months. The findings showed:
- No significant difference in all-cause mortality or hospitalizations between the two groups.
- However, 78% of the active group reported improved quality of life compared to 61% in the control group.
Conclusion
The study did not find that comprehensive RM improved overall clinical outcomes compared to standard RM. However, due to early termination, more research is needed.
Clinical Trial Registration
Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT03012490
Practical Solutions and Value
Clinical trials are essential for developing effective treatments. To make these benefits accessible in everyday practice, we offer:
- DocSym: An AI-driven platform that consolidates medical standards and research for clinicians.
- Mobile Apps: Tools for scheduling, monitoring treatments, and telemedicine to enhance patient care.
- AI Integration: Streamlining workflows and improving patient outcomes while reducing paperwork.
Discover how we can assist your practice at aidevmd.com.
