Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Cardiac Arrhythmia Network of Canada | OTHER |
| Medtronic | INDUSTRY |
| Abbott | INDUSTRY |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
While remote monitoring (RM) technology is currently available and has permitted surveillance and device assessment from any patient location, the use has been inconsistent in Canada, where only 8500 out of a potential 120 000 patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are enrolled in this program. This technology is in widespread use worldwide for all CIEDs but in Canada, it is utilized primarily for implantable defibrillators, but not pacemakers. Whereas most of the trials were designed to evaluate the efficacy of RM in implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients, in the pacemaker (PM) population, there has been work performed already to demonstrate an increase in detection of frequency of adverse clinical events and a reduction in reaction time to those events by RM. Based on all the available literature, it appears that RM benefits both patients and healthcare systems. Overall, studies have demonstrated that RM can be used safely in all device patient-populations, with the exception of pacemaker-dependent patients.
There have been no studies that have evaluated RM only follow up, nor have there been any studies evaluating pacemaker-dependent patients. This study that will safely assess the use of RM only, with in-clinic visits when necessary, that uses the patient-centered electronic platform developed by the Cardiac Arrhythmia Network of Canada (CANet) to perform PM follow up safely, in a more cost-effective manner.
This is a Canadian multicenter randomized controlled trial to assess remote patient management. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion, stratified by pacemaker dependence and by center to either remote patient management of standard of care.
Remote patient management (intervention group):
Standard of care (comparison group):
The standard arm will be required to have in-clinic visits at yearly intervals. These patients would not have access to the virtual patient cloud or to remote monitoring.
Pacemaker programming: All patients in both arms will undergo programming as per the ASSERT II protocol (previously published) to optimize pacemaker parameters and detection of atrial and ventricular high rate episodes.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remote Patient Management | Active Comparator | Remote monitoring only |
|
| Standard of Care | Placebo Comparator | In-clinic visits |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Remote Monitoring | Device | Remote Monitoring only + VIRTUES |
| |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Time to major adverse cardiac event (MACE) | Includes: death, stroke, hospitalization for a cardiovascular cause (unplanned hospitalization with an overnight stay in hospital) due to one of the following causes: acute coronary syndrome, presyncope / syncope, transient ischemic attack / stroke, ventricular arrhythmias, atrial fibrillation, flutter, pulmonary embolism / deep vein thrombosis /systemic embolism, worsening congestive heart failure including pulmonary edema or dyspnea of cardiac origin. | 18 months |
| Cost effectiveness | Cost comparison between groups (VIRTUES strategy versus Standard of Care). Analysis will take the form of a cost utility analysis with cost effectiveness assessed in terms of the incremental cost per quality life year (QALY) | 18 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Quality of Life - Short Form (SF36) | The SF-36 consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The eight sections are: vitality, physical functioning, bodily pain, general health perceptions, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, social role functioning, and mental health |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Ratika Parkash, MD FRCPC | Nova Scotia Health Authority | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Foothills Hospital | Calgary | Alberta | T2N 4Z6 | Canada | ||
| Victoria Cardiac Arrhythmia Trials |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D059039 | Standard of Care |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D019984 | Quality Indicators, Health Care |
| D011787 | Quality of Health Care |
| D006298 | Health Services Administration |
| D017530 | Health Care Quality, Access, and Evaluation |
Not provided
Not provided
Open label, 1:1 randomized trial, stratified by site and pacemaker dependence
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Standard of care |
| Other |
In-Clinic visits only |
|
| 18 months |
| Quality of Life - Florida Patient Acceptance Survey (FPAS) | The FPAS produces scores that range from 0-100, where higher scores indicate increased device acceptance. | 18 months |
| Quality of Life - Florida Shock Anxiety Scale (FSAS) | The FSAS produces scores that range from 10-50. Higher scores signify increased shock anxiety. | 18 months |
| Quality of Life - Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ) | Individual item analysis will be used in this study. The personal control score is the response to item 3. The treatment control score is the response to item 4. Illness concern is measured by item 6. This reflects a combination of emotional and cognitive representations. Scores on these individual items range from 0-10 where higher scores on personal and treatment concern are reflected in higher scores. Higher scores on illness concern are reflected in higher scores. | 18 months |
| Number of patients with device-related ER visits | Rate of device-related ER visits (<24 hours) | 18 months |
| Number of patients with syncope | Rate of syncope | 18 months |
| Number of patients experiencing ventricular arrhythmia events | Rate of ventricular arrhythmia episodes detected by the pacemaker | 18 months |
| Number of patients with atrial fibrillation | Rate of AF greater than 6 minutes detected by the pacemaker | 18 months |
| Victoria |
| British Columbia |
| V8T 1Z8 |
| Canada |
| Memorial University of Newfoundland Hospital | St. John's | Newfoundland and Labrador | Canada |
| QEII Health Sciences Center | Halifax | Nova Scotia | B3H 3A7 | Canada |
| St. Mary's General Hospital | Kitchener | Ontario | Canada |
| London Health Sciences Centre | London | Ontario | N6A 5W5 | Canada |
| Southlake Regional Health Centre | Newmarket | Ontario | L3Y 2P9 | Canada |
| Montreal Heart Institute | Montreal | Quebec | H1T 1C8 | Canada |
| Hopital Sacre Coeur | Montreal | Quebec | Canada |
| Hopital Laval | Québec | Quebec | Canada |
| Centre Hospitalier Universitaire du Sherbrooke | Sherbrooke | Quebec | J1H 5N4 | Canada |