Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Remote Hemodynamic Assessment Versus Standard Care in Patients With Heart Failure

In patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), remote hemodynamic monitoring can reduce heart failure exacerbation and mortality. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of remote hemodynamic monitoring with that of standard care in the management of patients with CHF. The remote monitoring g...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American journal of cardiology 2023-04, Vol.192, p.79-87
Main Authors: Buttar, Chandan, Lakhdar, Sofia, Nso, Nso, Guzman-Perez, Laura, Dao, Tristan, Mahmood, Kiran, Hendel, Robert, Lavie, Carl J., Collura, Giovina, Trandafirescu, Theo
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bias
Chi-square test
Cohort analysis
Congestive heart failure
Effectiveness
Heart Failure
Hemodynamics
Heterogeneity
Hospitalization
Humans
Meta-analysis
Monitoring
Monitoring, Physiologic - methods
Mortality
Pulmonary arteries
Remote monitoring
Statistical analysis
Statistical tests
Systematic review
Telemedicine
Variables
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-ecd79b378ce90a73f7f137197fe7aac2ed853e2dd8621354e54a2d7a0d6c55943
container_end_page 87
container_issue
container_start_page 79
container_title The American journal of cardiology
container_volume 192
creator Buttar, Chandan
Lakhdar, Sofia
Nso, Nso
Guzman-Perez, Laura
Dao, Tristan
Mahmood, Kiran
Hendel, Robert
Lavie, Carl J.
Collura, Giovina
Trandafirescu, Theo
description In patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), remote hemodynamic monitoring can reduce heart failure exacerbation and mortality. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of remote hemodynamic monitoring with that of standard care in the management of patients with CHF. The remote monitoring group included 7,733 patients, and the control group included 7,567 patients. Chi-square test and I-square statistics were used to assess heterogeneity. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using fixed-effects and random-effects methods to determine the risk of all-cause hospitalization and CHF-related hospitalization (primary outcomes) and all-cause mortality and device outcomes (secondary outcomes). Pooled findings indicated a 7% lower risk of all-cause hospitalization in the remote monitoring group than that in the control group (RR 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89 to 0.98, p = 0.004). The results also revealed a 32% lower risk of CHF-related hospitalization in the remote monitoring group than that in the control group (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.71, p
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.12.033
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2775613481</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0002914922013121</els_id><sourcerecordid>2775613481</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-ecd79b378ce90a73f7f137197fe7aac2ed853e2dd8621354e54a2d7a0d6c55943</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc2KFDEUhYMoTjv6CErAjZsqc5NKJbWSpnEcYWTE32XIJLc0Rf30JCmh39403bpw4-oS8p2bcD5CngOrgUH7eqjtNDgbfc0Z5zXwmgnxgGxAq66CDsRDsmGM8aqDprsgT1IayhFAto_JhWiV1LzVG7J-wGyr7WzHQwqJ7pZpb2OYf9DbNbtlwkSXnn7CaclIr8vwh9lOwdFtSpjShHOm3zCmNdHP2c6-_IfubEQaZvrR5lDuE_0e8s8StjHTKxvGNeJT8qi3Y8Jn53lJvl69_bK7rm5u373fbW8qJxrIFTqvujuhtMOOWSV61YNQ0KkelbWOo9dSIPdetxyEbFA2lntlmW-dlF0jLsmr0959XO5XTNlMITkcRzvjsibDlZItiEZDQV_-gw7LGksvR0pL0FoqUSh5olxcUorYm30Mk40HA8wcvZjBnL2YoxcD3BQvJffivH29m9D_Tf0RUYA3JwBLHb8CRpNcac-hDxFdNn4J_3niN4GLoYQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2785188573</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Remote Hemodynamic Assessment Versus Standard Care in Patients With Heart Failure</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><creator>Buttar, Chandan ; Lakhdar, Sofia ; Nso, Nso ; Guzman-Perez, Laura ; Dao, Tristan ; Mahmood, Kiran ; Hendel, Robert ; Lavie, Carl J. ; Collura, Giovina ; Trandafirescu, Theo</creator><creatorcontrib>Buttar, Chandan ; Lakhdar, Sofia ; Nso, Nso ; Guzman-Perez, Laura ; Dao, Tristan ; Mahmood, Kiran ; Hendel, Robert ; Lavie, Carl J. ; Collura, Giovina ; Trandafirescu, Theo</creatorcontrib><description>In patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), remote hemodynamic monitoring can reduce heart failure exacerbation and mortality. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of remote hemodynamic monitoring with that of standard care in the management of patients with CHF. The remote monitoring group included 7,733 patients, and the control group included 7,567 patients. Chi-square test and I-square statistics were used to assess heterogeneity. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using fixed-effects and random-effects methods to determine the risk of all-cause hospitalization and CHF-related hospitalization (primary outcomes) and all-cause mortality and device outcomes (secondary outcomes). Pooled findings indicated a 7% lower risk of all-cause hospitalization in the remote monitoring group than that in the control group (RR 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89 to 0.98, p = 0.004). The results also revealed a 32% lower risk of CHF-related hospitalization in the remote monitoring group than that in the control group (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.71, p &lt;0.001). No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups in terms of all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.07, p = 0.53) and device outcomes (RR 1.23 95% CI 0.92 to 1.65, p = 0.16). These results provided evidence regarding the comparable effectiveness of remote CHF monitoring and routine care. The current evidence is insufficient to introduce remote hemodynamic CHF monitoring; however, our results suggest that the integration of telemonitoring systems with routine medical management may improve heart failure care.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-9149</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1913</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.12.033</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36758268</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Bias ; Chi-square test ; Cohort analysis ; Congestive heart failure ; Effectiveness ; Heart Failure ; Hemodynamics ; Heterogeneity ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Meta-analysis ; Monitoring ; Monitoring, Physiologic - methods ; Mortality ; Pulmonary arteries ; Remote monitoring ; Statistical analysis ; Statistical tests ; Systematic review ; Telemedicine ; Variables</subject><ispartof>The American journal of cardiology, 2023-04, Vol.192, p.79-87</ispartof><rights>2023 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2023. Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-ecd79b378ce90a73f7f137197fe7aac2ed853e2dd8621354e54a2d7a0d6c55943</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5320-2990</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36758268$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Buttar, Chandan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lakhdar, Sofia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nso, Nso</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guzman-Perez, Laura</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dao, Tristan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahmood, Kiran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hendel, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lavie, Carl J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collura, Giovina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trandafirescu, Theo</creatorcontrib><title>Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Remote Hemodynamic Assessment Versus Standard Care in Patients With Heart Failure</title><title>The American journal of cardiology</title><addtitle>Am J Cardiol</addtitle><description>In patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), remote hemodynamic monitoring can reduce heart failure exacerbation and mortality. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of remote hemodynamic monitoring with that of standard care in the management of patients with CHF. The remote monitoring group included 7,733 patients, and the control group included 7,567 patients. Chi-square test and I-square statistics were used to assess heterogeneity. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using fixed-effects and random-effects methods to determine the risk of all-cause hospitalization and CHF-related hospitalization (primary outcomes) and all-cause mortality and device outcomes (secondary outcomes). Pooled findings indicated a 7% lower risk of all-cause hospitalization in the remote monitoring group than that in the control group (RR 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89 to 0.98, p = 0.004). The results also revealed a 32% lower risk of CHF-related hospitalization in the remote monitoring group than that in the control group (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.71, p &lt;0.001). No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups in terms of all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.07, p = 0.53) and device outcomes (RR 1.23 95% CI 0.92 to 1.65, p = 0.16). These results provided evidence regarding the comparable effectiveness of remote CHF monitoring and routine care. The current evidence is insufficient to introduce remote hemodynamic CHF monitoring; however, our results suggest that the integration of telemonitoring systems with routine medical management may improve heart failure care.</description><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Chi-square test</subject><subject>Cohort analysis</subject><subject>Congestive heart failure</subject><subject>Effectiveness</subject><subject>Heart Failure</subject><subject>Hemodynamics</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>Hospitalization</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Monitoring</subject><subject>Monitoring, Physiologic - methods</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Pulmonary arteries</subject><subject>Remote monitoring</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Statistical tests</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Telemedicine</subject><subject>Variables</subject><issn>0002-9149</issn><issn>1879-1913</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc2KFDEUhYMoTjv6CErAjZsqc5NKJbWSpnEcYWTE32XIJLc0Rf30JCmh39403bpw4-oS8p2bcD5CngOrgUH7eqjtNDgbfc0Z5zXwmgnxgGxAq66CDsRDsmGM8aqDprsgT1IayhFAto_JhWiV1LzVG7J-wGyr7WzHQwqJ7pZpb2OYf9DbNbtlwkSXnn7CaclIr8vwh9lOwdFtSpjShHOm3zCmNdHP2c6-_IfubEQaZvrR5lDuE_0e8s8StjHTKxvGNeJT8qi3Y8Jn53lJvl69_bK7rm5u373fbW8qJxrIFTqvujuhtMOOWSV61YNQ0KkelbWOo9dSIPdetxyEbFA2lntlmW-dlF0jLsmr0959XO5XTNlMITkcRzvjsibDlZItiEZDQV_-gw7LGksvR0pL0FoqUSh5olxcUorYm30Mk40HA8wcvZjBnL2YoxcD3BQvJffivH29m9D_Tf0RUYA3JwBLHb8CRpNcac-hDxFdNn4J_3niN4GLoYQ</recordid><startdate>20230401</startdate><enddate>20230401</enddate><creator>Buttar, Chandan</creator><creator>Lakhdar, Sofia</creator><creator>Nso, Nso</creator><creator>Guzman-Perez, Laura</creator><creator>Dao, Tristan</creator><creator>Mahmood, Kiran</creator><creator>Hendel, Robert</creator><creator>Lavie, Carl J.</creator><creator>Collura, Giovina</creator><creator>Trandafirescu, Theo</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5320-2990</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230401</creationdate><title>Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Remote Hemodynamic Assessment Versus Standard Care in Patients With Heart Failure</title><author>Buttar, Chandan ; Lakhdar, Sofia ; Nso, Nso ; Guzman-Perez, Laura ; Dao, Tristan ; Mahmood, Kiran ; Hendel, Robert ; Lavie, Carl J. ; Collura, Giovina ; Trandafirescu, Theo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-ecd79b378ce90a73f7f137197fe7aac2ed853e2dd8621354e54a2d7a0d6c55943</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Chi-square test</topic><topic>Cohort analysis</topic><topic>Congestive heart failure</topic><topic>Effectiveness</topic><topic>Heart Failure</topic><topic>Hemodynamics</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>Hospitalization</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Monitoring</topic><topic>Monitoring, Physiologic - methods</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Pulmonary arteries</topic><topic>Remote monitoring</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Statistical tests</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Telemedicine</topic><topic>Variables</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Buttar, Chandan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lakhdar, Sofia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nso, Nso</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guzman-Perez, Laura</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dao, Tristan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahmood, Kiran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hendel, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lavie, Carl J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collura, Giovina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trandafirescu, Theo</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Journals</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health and Medical</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American journal of cardiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Buttar, Chandan</au><au>Lakhdar, Sofia</au><au>Nso, Nso</au><au>Guzman-Perez, Laura</au><au>Dao, Tristan</au><au>Mahmood, Kiran</au><au>Hendel, Robert</au><au>Lavie, Carl J.</au><au>Collura, Giovina</au><au>Trandafirescu, Theo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Remote Hemodynamic Assessment Versus Standard Care in Patients With Heart Failure</atitle><jtitle>The American journal of cardiology</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Cardiol</addtitle><date>2023-04-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>192</volume><spage>79</spage><epage>87</epage><pages>79-87</pages><issn>0002-9149</issn><eissn>1879-1913</eissn><abstract>In patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), remote hemodynamic monitoring can reduce heart failure exacerbation and mortality. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of remote hemodynamic monitoring with that of standard care in the management of patients with CHF. The remote monitoring group included 7,733 patients, and the control group included 7,567 patients. Chi-square test and I-square statistics were used to assess heterogeneity. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using fixed-effects and random-effects methods to determine the risk of all-cause hospitalization and CHF-related hospitalization (primary outcomes) and all-cause mortality and device outcomes (secondary outcomes). Pooled findings indicated a 7% lower risk of all-cause hospitalization in the remote monitoring group than that in the control group (RR 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89 to 0.98, p = 0.004). The results also revealed a 32% lower risk of CHF-related hospitalization in the remote monitoring group than that in the control group (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.71, p &lt;0.001). No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups in terms of all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.07, p = 0.53) and device outcomes (RR 1.23 95% CI 0.92 to 1.65, p = 0.16). These results provided evidence regarding the comparable effectiveness of remote CHF monitoring and routine care. The current evidence is insufficient to introduce remote hemodynamic CHF monitoring; however, our results suggest that the integration of telemonitoring systems with routine medical management may improve heart failure care.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>36758268</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.12.033</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5320-2990</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0002-9149
ispartof The American journal of cardiology, 2023-04, Vol.192, p.79-87
issn 0002-9149
1879-1913
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2775613481
source ScienceDirect Freedom Collection
subjects Bias
Chi-square test
Cohort analysis
Congestive heart failure
Effectiveness
Heart Failure
Hemodynamics
Heterogeneity
Hospitalization
Humans
Meta-analysis
Monitoring
Monitoring, Physiologic - methods
Mortality
Pulmonary arteries
Remote monitoring
Statistical analysis
Statistical tests
Systematic review
Telemedicine
Variables
title Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Remote Hemodynamic Assessment Versus Standard Care in Patients With Heart Failure
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-19T07%3A29%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Meta-Analysis%20Comparing%20Outcomes%20of%20Remote%20Hemodynamic%20Assessment%20Versus%20Standard%20Care%20in%20Patients%20With%20Heart%20Failure&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20journal%20of%20cardiology&rft.au=Buttar,%20Chandan&rft.date=2023-04-01&rft.volume=192&rft.spage=79&rft.epage=87&rft.pages=79-87&rft.issn=0002-9149&rft.eissn=1879-1913&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.12.033&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2775613481%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-ecd79b378ce90a73f7f137197fe7aac2ed853e2dd8621354e54a2d7a0d6c55943%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2785188573&rft_id=info:pmid/36758268&rfr_iscdi=true