Clinician use of data elements from cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in clinical practice.

Background: Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) capture an abundance of data for clinicians to review and integrate into the clinical decision-making process. The multitude of data from different device types and vendors presents challenges for viewing and using the data in clinical practice. Efforts are needed to improve CIED reports by focusing on key data elements used by clinicians. Objective: The purpose of this study was to uncover the extent to which clinicians use the specific types of data elements from CIED reports in clinical practice and explore clinicians' perceptions of CIED reports. Methods: A brief, web-based, cross-sectional survey study was deployed using snowball sampling from March 2020 through September 2020 to clinicians who are involved in the care of patients with CIEDs. Results: Among 317 clinicians, the majority specialized in electrophysiology (EP) (80.1%), were from North America (88.6%), and were white (82.2%). Over half (55.3%) were physicians. Arrhythmia episodes and ventricular therapies rated the highest among 15 categories of data presented, and nocturnal or resting heart rate and heart rate variability were rated the lowest. As anticipated, clinicians specializing in EP reported using the data significantly more than other specialties across nearly all categories. A subset of respondents offered general comments describing preferences and challenges related to reviewing reports. Conclusion: CIED reports contain an abundance of information that is important to clinicians; however, some data are used more frequently than others, and reports could be streamlined for users to improve access to key information and facilitate more efficient clinical decision making.

Health informatics interventions to minimize out-of-pocket medication costs for patients: what providers want.

Objective: To explore diverse provider perspectives on: strategies for addressing patient medication cost barriers; patient medication cost information gaps; current medication cost-related informatics tools; and design features for future tool development. Materials and Methods: We conducted 38 semistructured interviews with providers (physicians, nurses, pharmacists, social workers, and administrators) in a Midwestern health system in the United States. We used 3 rounds of qualitative coding to identify themes. Results: Providers lacked access to information about: patients' ability to pay for medications; true costs of full medication regimens; and cost impacts of patient insurance changes. Some providers said that while existing cost-related tools were helpful, they contained unclear insurance information and several questioned the information's quality. Cost-related information was not available to everyone who needed it and was not always available when needed. Fragmentation of information across sources made cost-alleviation information difficult to access. Providers desired future tools to compare medication costs more directly; provide quick references on costs to facilitate clinical conversations; streamline medication resource referrals; and provide centrally accessible visual summaries of patient affordability challenges. Discussion: These findings can inform the next generation of informatics tools for minimizing patients' out-of-pocket costs. Future tools should support the work of a wider range of providers and situations and use cases than current tools do. Such tools would have the potential to improve prescribing decisions and better link patients to resources. Conclusion: Results identified opportunities to fill multidisciplinary providers' information gaps and ways in which new tools could better support medication affordability for patients.

"It's a mess sometimes": patient perspectives on provider responses to healthcare costs, and how informatics interventions can help support cost-sensitive care decisions.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated patient experiences with medication- and test-related cost conversations with healthcare providers to identify their preferences for future informatics tools to facilitate cost-sensitive care decisions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted 18 semistructured interviews with diverse patients (ages 24-81) in a Midwestern health system in the United States. We identified themes through 2 rounds of qualitative coding. RESULTS: Patients believed their providers could help reduce medication-related costs but did not see how providers could influence test-related costs. Patients viewed cost conversations about medications as beneficial when providers could adjust medical recommendations or provide resources. However, cost conversations did not always occur when patients felt they were needed. Consequently, patients faced a "cascade of work" to address affordability challenges. To prevent this, collaborative informatics tools could facilitate cost conversations and shared decision-making by providing information about a patient's financial constraints, enabling comparisons of medication/testing options, and addressing transportation logistics to facilitate patient follow-through. DISCUSSION: Like providers, patients want informatics tools that address patient out-of-pocket costs. They want to discuss healthcare costs to reduce the frequency of unaffordable costs and obtain proactive assistance. Informatics interventions could minimize the cascade of patient work through shared decision-making and preventative actions. Such tools might integrate information about efficacy, costs, and side effects to support decisions, present patient decision aids, facilitate coordination among healthcare units, and eventually improve patient outcomes. CONCLUSION: To prevent a burdensome cascade of work for patients, informatics tools could be designed to support cost conversations and decisions between patients and providers.

Organizational Models for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Remote Monitoring: Current and Future Directions.

This review provides an overview of the literature on the organization, staffing, and structure of remote monitoring (RM) clinics, primarily from countries in Western Europe and United States, as well as the challenges, considerations, and future directions for RM clinic models of care. Using a current case example of an RM clinic in the Midwestern United States, this document provides key information from the viewpoint of a clinic undergoing a shift in workflow. Finally, this review distills key considerations for RM management for electrophysiology clinics, vendors and industry, and policy makers.

Engaging Patients in Atrial Fibrillation Management via Digital Health Technology: The Impact of Tailored Messaging.

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) demonstrate persistent knowledge gaps regarding their condition and a substandard adherence to oral anticoagulant (OAC) medication, which contribute to thromboembolic stroke and other clot-related complications. Tailored patient education and medication reminders may help reduce these negative health outcomes. We sought to improve disease knowledge and medication adherence among a sample of AF patients using tailored education and nudges. The intervention leveraged three digital health technologies: a patient portal, an electronic-prescribing data feed, and a smart pill bottle. The content of the educational messaging, nudges, and cadence were tailored according to findings from our user-centered design studies and delivered via a patient portal (MyChart®; Epic Systems, Verona, WI, USA), with which participants were familiar. In a six-month randomized controlled trial with parallel groups, we used MyChart® to send educational messages and medication reminders according to a decision tree that emerged from our prior user-centered design studies. The intervention group demonstrated higher AF knowledge at study completion than the control group and more MyChart® logins throughout the trial, suggesting intervention uptake. Women were more adherent than men and patients diagnosed more than one year ago were more adherent than those with more recent diagnoses. The intervention and control group adherence rates were 93.1% and 89.5%, respectively; intervention effect was moderated by age, medication type, and prior MyChart® use. Within the intervention group, younger patients, those taking once-daily rivaroxaban, and those who were less active MyChart® users prior to the study benefited relative to their control group counterparts. Tailored educational and reminder messages contributed to increased adherence and disease knowledge among AF patients, though certain patient characteristics moderated the intervention's effectiveness. Technology-based health interventions can be useful for older adults with effective tailoring and training.

Medication adherence for atrial fibrillation patients: triangulating measures from a smart pill bottle, e-prescribing software, and patient communication through the electronic health record.

OBJECTIVE: Our primary objectives were to examine adherence rates across two technologies (e-prescribing software and smart pill bottle) with cross-validation from alert-triggered messaging within the patient electronic health record (EHR) portal and to explore the benefits and challenges faced by atrial fibrillation (AF) patients in using a smart pill bottle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We triangulated the rate of oral anticoagulant medication adherence among 160 AF patients over 6 months using an EHR in combination with data from the AdhereTech© Wireless Smart Pill Bottle and Surescripts©. In addition, we collected qualitative feedback on patients' Smart Pill Bottle usage through structured interviews with 153 participants. RESULTS: Patients maintained an average adherence rate of 90.0% according to the smart pill bottle; however, when dose misses were calibrated based on patient or provider feedback, the adjusted adherence was 93.6%. Surescripts adherence rates for refills were 92.2%. Participants generally found the bottle easy to operate but suggested that its size and functionality did not fit seamlessly into their existing routine, as many used weekly pill organizers to manage multiple medications. DISCUSSION: Though each method of tracking adherence has positive and negative attributes, combining them and seeking patient feedback may help capture a more accurate adherence rate than any single technological intervention. Technologies may have different design considerations for research and consumer use. CONCLUSION: Overall, these technologies provide useful but imperfect adherence data for research purposes, and smart pill bottles could be improved with patient-centered design. LAY SUMMARY: Medication adherence is very important for those with chronic health issues. For those with heart disease, medication adherence not only offers opportunities for improving quality of life, but it also can be life-saving. Nonetheless, many patients with heart disease, including those with atrial fibrillation (the target group for this study) do not take their medications regularly. As technologies advance, there is unprecedented opportunity to track patients' medication adherence through various methods, which might provide motivation and information to patients as they make daily choices about medication use. In this study, we cross-referenced the results of two of these measures over 6 months-a smart pill bottle, which we used to track pill bottle openings, and e-prescribing software, which we used to track medication refills. We also supplemented these measures with nurse-patient communication via the EHR messaging portal to record exceptions (eg, travel and medication changes) and interviewed patients about their medication use during the 6-month trial. Overall, the tracking technologies worked relatively well to track patient (n = 160) medication behavior; however, they did not capture exceptions. Hence, triangulating data from different sources, with a patient feedback loop, appears critical for gathering accurate data on medication adherence.

Can nurses help improve self-care of patients living with atrial fibrillation? A focus group study exploring patients' disease knowledge gaps.

Aims: To identify knowledge gaps and preferences for educational material to improve nurse-patient communication and self-care. Design: Using a mixed-methods design, we conducted focus groups and quantitative surveys. Methods: We conducted three focus groups with atrial fibrillation (AF) patients and support persons (N = 17 participants; 66 ± 16 years) at critical treatment junctures (recent diagnosis or medication switch). Patients and support persons were also surveyed on patient activation (self-management skills and knowledge), medication adherence, AF knowledge and health literacy. Iterative thematic analysis was performed using focus group transcripts. Results: Although most participants had adequate health literacy, most reported gaps in AF knowledge. Participants lacked disease-related knowledge and were unsure how to manage health behaviours (e.g. diet and exercise). Few felt they received adequate education from their healthcare provider. Results emphasize the need for consistent information from nursing staff, in lay language, via both electronic and printed means.

Involving patients as key stakeholders in the design of cardiovascular implantable electronic device data dashboards: Implications for patient care.

BACKGROUND: Data from remote monitoring (RM) of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) currently are not accessible to patients despite demand. The typical RM report contains multiple pages of data for trained technicians to read and interpret and requires a patient-centered approach to be curated to meet individual user needs. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to understand which RM data elements are important to patients and to gain design insights for displaying meaningful data in a digital dashboard. METHODS: Adults with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and pacemakers (PMs) participated in this 2-phase, user-centered design study. Phase 1 included a card-sorting activity to prioritize device data elements. Phase 2 included one-on-one design sessions to gather insights and feedback about a visual display (labels and icons). RESULTS: Twenty-nine adults (mean age 71.8 ± 11.6 years; 51.7% female; 89.7% white) participated. Priority data elements for both ICD and PM groups in phase 1 (n = 19) were related to cardiac episodes, device activity, and impedance values. Recommended replacement time for battery was high priority for the PM group but not the ICD group. Phase 2 (n = 10) revealed that patients would like descriptive, nontechnical terms to depict the data and icons that are intuitive and informative. CONCLUSION: This user-centered design study demonstrated that patients with ICDs and PMs were able to prioritize specific data from a comprehensive list of data elements that they had never seen before. This work contributes to the goal of sharing RM data with patients in a way that optimizes the RM feature of CIEDs for improving patient outcomes and clinical care.

Patient responses to daily cardiac resynchronization therapy device data: A pilot trial assessing a novel patient-centered digital dashboard in everyday life.

Background: Heart failure (HF) is a growing public health problem in the United States. Implantable cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices reduce mortality and morbidity, and remote monitoring (RM) of these devices improves outcomes. However, patient RM adherence is low, due in part to lack of access to their RM data. Providing these data to patients may increase engagement, but they must be appropriately tailored to ensure understanding. Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine patients' experiences interacting with their RM data through a novel digital dashboard as part of daily life. Methods: In this mixed-methods pilot study, 10 patients with implantable CRT defibrillators were given access to a patient-centered RM data dashboard, updated daily for 6-12 months. Pre- and post-health literacy, engagement, electronic portal (MyChart, Epic Systems Corporation) logins, and RM adherence were measured; system usability scores were collected at exit; and dashboard views were tracked. Exit interviews were conducted to elucidate patients' experiences. Results: Participants (100% white; 60% male; age 34-80 years [mean ± SD: 62.0 ± 13.4]) had adequate health literacy, increased MyChart logins (P = .0463), and nonsignificant increase in RM adherence. Participants viewed their dashboards 0-42 times (mean 14.9 ± 12.5). Interviews revealed participants generally appreciated access to their data, understood it, and responded to changes; however, questions and concerns remained regarding data interpretation and visualization. Conclusion: Preliminary findings support potential future integration of a CRT RM data dashboard in the daily care of HF patients. With appropriate informational support and personalization, sharing RM data with patients in a tailored dashboard may improve health engagement.

Visualization of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Data for Older Adults Using Participatory Design.

Patients with heart failure (HF) are commonly implanted with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices as part of their treatment. Presently, they cannot directly access the remote monitoring (RM) data generated from these devices, representing a missed opportunity for increased knowledge and engagement in care. However, electronic health data sharing can create information overload issues for both clinicians and patients, and some older patients may not be comfortable using the technology (i.e., computers and smartphones) necessary to access this data. To mitigate these problems, patients can be directly involved in the creation of data visualization tailored to their preferences and needs, allowing them to successfully interpret and act upon their health data. We held a participatory design (PD) session with seven adult patients with HF and CRT device implants, who were presently undergoing RM, along with two informal caregivers. Working in three teams, participants used drawing supplies and design cards to design a prototype for a patient-facing dashboard with which they could engage with their device data. Information that patients rated as a high priority for the "Main Dashboard" screen included average percent pacing with alerts for abnormal pacing, other device information such as battery life and recorded events, and information about who to contact with for data-related questions. Preferences for inclusion in an "Additional Information" display included a daily pacing chart, health tips, aborted shocks, a symptom list, and a journal. These results informed the creation of an actual dashboard prototype which was later evaluated by both patients and clinicians. Additionally, important insights were gleaned regarding the involvement of older patients in PD for health technology.

Delivering remote monitoring data to patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: Does medium matter?

BACKGROUND: This study presents findings on the impact of providing patients with their implantable device data on patients' satisfaction, engagement, healthcare utilization, and provider's perceptions of this practice. Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) improves patient care through timely delivery of ICD data to the clinic. However, patients usually do not receive their ICD data. Providers are concerned that messaging patients with their device data could increase clinical workload. METHODS: To evaluate the impact of sharing ICD data summary through the patient portal, 128 patients were randomized into two groups. Group A and B received their data through the patient portal and postal mail, respectively. Data were collected through surveys and medical record reviews. Forty-eight providers also completed a survey. RESULTS: At the end of the study, at least two-thirds of patients were satisfied with the amount of information received through the electronic or paper ICD data summary. Additionally, providing patients with their device data did not increase ICD-specific clinical workload (e.g., calls or messages to provider). While providers did not foresee the provision of ICD data to patients as decreasing or improving clinical workload, they did see potential value in it for patients. CONCLUSIONS: Providing patients with their ICD data (through paper or electronic means) might have the potential to improve patient satisfaction and enhance shared-decision making without adversely impacting clinical workload.