Cited by 134Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring

Remote Monitoring of CRT‐ICD: The Multicenter Italian CareLink Evaluation—Ease of Use, Acceptance, and Organizational Implications

MARZEGALLI, MAURIZIO, LUNATI, MAURIZIO, LANDOLINA, MAURIZIO, PEREGO, GIOVANNI B., RICCI, RENATO P., GUENZATI, GIUSEPPE, SCHIRRU, MILENA, BELVITO, CHIARA +5 more·2008·Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

Abstract

Purpose: The Medtronic CareLink allows remote implantable device follow‐up. In this first European experience with CareLink, we assessed the ease of use of the system, the acceptance, and satisfaction of patients and clinicians. Methods: Patients implanted with biventricular defibrillators for more than 6 months received the CareLink monitor and were trained to perform home device interrogation and transmission. Patient and clinician experience and preference were evaluated through specific questionnaires. Results: Sixty‐seven patients were enrolled and were able to perform data transmissions during the 3‐month study duration. The overall duration of interrogation procedure was 7 ± 5 minutes, and frequently the procedure did not require the assistance of a caregiver. Patients reported a general preference for remote versus in‐clinic follow‐up and described a sense of reassurance created by the remote monitoring capability. In the centers, the review procedure was successful; its mean duration was 5 ± 2 minutes per transmission and the users indicated that the access and navigation of the review website were easy. At the end of the evaluation, the data available for remote review were judged complete and adequate to provide almost the same standard of care as that offered in traditional in‐clinic visit. In general, the remote monitoring was seen as a potential tool to improve the clinical management of patients with device. Conclusions: The ease of use, satisfaction, and acceptance of the CareLink Network in European clinical practice appears elevated both for patients and for clinicians.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2008.01175.x

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Surveys reveal that patients prefer home to in-office monitoring, and physicians find that the systems are user friendly.

    “In general, surveys reveal that patients prefer home to in-office monitoring, and physicians find that the systems are user friendly.52,53”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MARZEGALLI, M., LUNATI, M., LANDOLINA, M., PEREGO, G. B., RICCI, R. P., GUENZATI, G., SCHIRRU, M., BELVITO, C., BRAMBILLA, R., MASELLA, C., DI STASI, F., VALSECCHI, S., & SANTINI, M.
Affiliations
  • Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedale San Carlo Borromeo (IT)
  • Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda (IT)
  • Policlinico San Matteo Fondazione (IT)
  • IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano (IT)
  • Ospedale San Filippo Neri (IT)
  • Politecnico di Milano (IT)
  • Medtronic (Italy) (IT)
Corresponding author
SANTINI, MASSIMO
Venue
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-09-15
Volume
31
Issue
10
Pages
1259-1264
ISSN
  • 0147-8389 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-8159
OpenAlex
W1984630213
Cited by
134
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 13
FWCI
9.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Virtual Community of Pathological Anatomy (University of Castilla La Mancha) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Keywords
remote monitoring, CRT-ICD, patient satisfaction, provider satisfaction, ease of use, patient acceptance
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Heart Failure, Humans, Italy, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Patient Satisfaction, Defibrillators, Implantable, Remote Consultation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review