Patients found the AliveCor app ‘significantly easier to use’ than ambulatory monitors. Throughout the 2-week study, 32 patients who had had some symptoms of cardiac arrhythmias, were required to use both methods to record when they were having palpitations. The UB researchers found AliveCor Heart Monitor smartphone app correctly recorded 91% of total arrhythmic events experienced by patients vs 87.5% recorded by the event monitors.
Patients were far more likely to be compliant with the smartphone app, the study found, with 94% of patients complying with the smartphone app versus just 58% with the event monitor.
“The point of the study was to determine whether any smartphone app could be good enough to replace what we normally use now, which is a 14-30 day event monitor,” said Curtis, who is also chief executive officer of UBMD Internal Medicine. She described the drawbacks to the event monitors that cardiac patients have to wear for anywhere from two to four weeks.
“The event monitors require electrocardiographic electrodes to be attached to the patient’s skin, which can be irritating,” she said. “Then the patient has to wear the device that is attached to the electrodes, which is somewhat cumbersome, and most patients do not like to wear it in public. Hence, compliance is often poor.” With the event monitor, a patient experiencing palpitations must press a button to note they are having symptoms and then indicate what type of symptom it is either on a paper log or by inputting the information onto the monitor.
With the smartphone app, the patient experiencing palpitations puts a finger from each hand onto the surface of anelectrode attached to a smartphone case. The data can then be uploaded to the AliveCor server through a secure, HIPAA-compliant transmission. http://www.buffalo.edu/news/releases/2016/05/007.html
Recent Comments