medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Revista Mexicana de Enfermería Cardiológica

ISSN 1405-0315 (Print)
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2015, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Enf Cardiol 2015; 23 (1)

Nursing consultation for remote monitoring of patients with implantable cardiac devices

Rodríguez MMM, Valle RJI
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 28-34
PDF size: 206.99 Kb.


Key words:

Implantable defibrillator, artificial pacemaker, remote monitoring, nursing care.

ABSTRACT

A better compliance with clinical practice guidelines and technological advances implemented in cardiac devices improve the quality of life and survival of patients carrying them. These patients require periodic monitoring as a part of the therapeutic process, but the complexity of their control, the frequent security alerts from generators and electrodes, the increase in the number of carriers, fill up the consulting rooms, and consequently the interval between checkups needs to be longer. Remote monitoring it is a system that provides remote, real-time, comprehensive information about the condition and operation of implantable cardiac devices, and allows patient’s management to be optimized, unnecessary displacements to be avoided and healthcare costs to be reduced. Objectives: To evaluate the current clinical practice on monitoring and the nursing roles, and review and redesign our monitoring protocol as an area of improvement. Methodology: A bibliographical search was conducted using the MeSH descriptors: implantable defibrillator, artificial pacemakers, remote monitoring and nursing care, in the databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL take care and bounded to the papers published in the last six years. The search is based on the review of new organizational models for remote monitoring, the results thereof were analyzed and a critical evaluation of our interventions was made in order to update our nursing consultation protocol. Results: The current guidelines to reduce variability of care define the objectives, frequency, content and functions of the remote monitoring of the professionals involved. Based on the evidence and our experience, has been updated the protocol of care for these patients. Conclusions: Remote monitoring requires skilled nursing professionals in cardiac stimulation, with ongoing training and essential roles, so as to improve the efficacy of follow up, make an early identification of risk situations in order to anticipate clinical decisions, avoid unnecessary displacements and reduce costs, all of which are highly important and significant aspects in healthcare. The nursing action should be based on evidence and current guidelines in order to encourage excellence in the care of these patients.


REFERENCES

  1. Brignole M, Auricchio A, Barón-Esquivias G, Bordachar P, Boriani T, Breithardt OA et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy: the task force on cardiac pacing and resynchronization therapy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). Europace. 2013; 15(8): 1070-1118.

  2. Wilkoff BL, Auricchio A, Brugada J, Cowie M, Ellenbogen KA, Gillis AM et al. HRS/EHRA Expert Consensus on the Monitoring of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs): description of techniques, indications, personnel, frequency and ethical considerations: developed in partnership with the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA); and in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), the Heart Failure Association of ESC (HFA), and the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA). Endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society, the European Heart Rhythm Association (a registered branch of the ESC), the American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association. Europace. 2008; 10(6): 707-725.

  3. Dubner S, Auricchio A, Steinberg JS, Vardas P, Stone P, Brugada J et al. ISHNE/EHRA expert consensus on remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Europace. 2012; 14(2): 278-293.

  4. Saxon LA, Hayes DL, Gilliam FR, Heidenreich PA, Day J, Seth M et al. Long-term outcome after ICD and CRT implantation and influence of remote device follow-up. The ALTITUDE survival study. Circulation. 2010; 122(23): 2359-2367.

  5. Crossley GH, Boyle A, Vitense H, Chang Y, Mead RH. The CONNECT (Clinical Evaluation of Remote Notification to Reduce Time to Clinical Decision) trial: the value of wireless remote monitoring with automatic clinician alerts. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011; 57(10): 1181-1189.

  6. Varma N, Michalski J, Stambler B, Pavri BB. Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial-testing execution of the recommendations. Eur Heart J. 2014; 35(20): 1345-1352.

  7. Ricci RP, Morichelli L, D’Onofrio A, Calò L, Vaccari D, Zanotto G et al. Effectiveness of remote monitoring of CIEDs in detection and treatment of clinical and device-related cardiovascular events in daily practice: the HomeGuide Registry. Europace. 2013; 15(7): 970-977.

  8. Ricci RP, Calcagnini G, Castro A, Giada F, Igidbashan D, Landolina M et al. Consensus document on remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices: technology, indications, organizational models, acceptability, responsibility, and economic issues. G Ital Cardiol. 2011; 12(6): 450-467.

  9. de Cock CC, Elders J, van Hemel NM, van den Broek K, van Erven L, de Mol B et al. Remote monitoring and follow-up of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in the Netherlands: An expert consensus report of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology. Neth Heart J. 2012; 20(2): 53-65.

  10. Sancho-Tello MJ, Fidalgo-Andrés ML, Martínez-Ferrer J, Ruiz-Mateas F. Novedades en estimulación cardiaca. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2012; 65(Supl 1): 82-90.

  11. Sorbet-Izco S. Monitorización domiciliaria. En: Rodríguez-Morales MM, Alsina-Restoy J. Manual de enfermería en estimulación cardiaca y dispositivos implantables. Barcelona: Aureagrafics; 2010. p. 255-266.

  12. Rodríguez-Morales MM, Lozano-Herrera JM, Nieto-García E, Correa-Vilches C. Monitorización domiciliaria de pacientes portadores de dispositivos cardiacos implantables: actividades de enfermería en la atención de estos pacientes. Enferm Cardiol. 2010; 49(1): 42-46.

  13. Hernández-Madrid A, Lewalter T, Proclemer A, Pison L, Lip GY, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C. Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices in Europe: results of the European Heart Rhythm Association survey. Europace. 2014; 16(1): 129-132.

  14. Bulechek GM, Butcher HK, McCloskey J. Clasificación de Intervenciones de Enfermería (NIC). 5a edición. Madrid: Elsevier; 2009.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Rev Mex Enf Cardiol. 2015;23