Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Triage‐HF Plus: a novel device‐based remote monitoring pathway to identify worsening heart failure
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Triage‐HF Plus: a novel device‐based remote monitoring pathway to identify worsening heart failure
Do you wish to request the book?
Triage‐HF Plus: a novel device‐based remote monitoring pathway to identify worsening heart failure
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Triage‐HF Plus: a novel device‐based remote monitoring pathway to identify worsening heart failure
2020
Overview
Aims
Remote monitoring of patients with physiological data derived from cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIEDs) offers potential to reconfigure clinical services. The ‘Heart Failure Risk Score' (HFRS) uses input from integrated device physiological monitoring to risk‐stratify patients as low‐risk, medium‐risk, or high‐risk of a heart failure event in the next 30 days. This study aimed to evaluate a novel clinical pathway utilizing a combination of CIED risk‐stratification and telephone triage to identify patients with worsening heart failure (WHF).
Methods and results
A prospective, single‐centre, real‐world evaluation of the ‘Triage‐HF Plus' clinical pathway (HFRS in combination with telephone triage) over a 27 month period. One hundred and fifty‐seven high‐risk HFRS transmissions were referred for telephone triage assessment. Interventions were at the discretion of the clinical assessor acting in accordance with clinical guidelines. An additional 3month consecutive sample of low and medium HFRS transmissions (control group) were also contacted for telephone triage assessment (n = 98). Successful telephone contact was made in 127 (81%) of referred high‐risk HFRS cases: 71 (55.9%) were confirmed to have WHF requiring intervention; 19 (14.9%) had an alternative acute medical problem; one patient had been recently discharged from hospital with WHF; and 36 (28.0%) had no apparent cause for the high score. In the control group, only one patient had symptoms of WHF. The sensitivity and specificity of CIED‐based remote monitoring to identify WHF 98.6% (92.5–100.0%) and 63.4% (55.2–71.0%), respectively.
Conclusions
The Triage‐HF Plus clinical pathway is a potentially useful remote monitoring tool for patients with heart failure and in situ CIEDs.
