Cited by 245ECG Monitoring and AnalysisCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Cardiac Event Recorders Yield More Diagnoses and Are More Cost-effective than 48-Hour Holter Monitoring in Patients with Palpitations: A Controlled Clinical Trial

Kinlay, Scott, Leitch, James W., Neil, Amanda, Chapman, Barry L., Hardy, David B., Fletcher, Peter J.·1996·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic yield and cost-effectiveness of transtelephonic event monitors with those of Holter monitoring in patients with intermittent palpitations. DESIGN: Randomized crossover trial. SETTING: Diagnostic service of a teaching hospital and surrounding primary care practices. PATIENTS: 43 patients with previously uninvestigated palpitations who were referred for Holter monitoring. MEASUREMENTS: Patients were randomly allocated to receive an event monitor or 48-hour Holter monitor and then to receive the other device. Event monitors were used for 3 months or until two recordings were obtained while symptoms occurred. The main end point was an electrogram recorded during symptoms. The incremental cost-effectiveness of obtaining a diagnostic rhythm strip from event monitors was compared with that of Holter monitoring. RESULTS: The mean (+/- SD) patient age was 45 +/- 19 years; 37 patients (88%) were women. Event monitors were twice as likely to provide a diagnostic rhythm strip electrocardiogram during symptoms as 48-hour Holter monitoring (29 patients [67%] and 15 patients [35%], respectively; P < 0.001). Event monitors detected 8 patients (19%) with clinically important arrhythmias (6 patients with supraventricular tachycardia and 2 with atrial fibrillation or flutter), whereas the Holter monitors detected no significant arrhythmia (P < 0.005). With the event monitors, most patients transmitted an electrocardiogram recording by 6 weeks. Event monitors were dominant and therefore more cost-effective than 48-hour Holter monitoring, resulting in a cost savings of $213 for each additional diagnostic rhythm strip obtained during symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Holter monitoring is a poor diagnostic test for intermittent palpitations. Event recorders provide better data and are more cost-effective.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/0003-4819-124-1_part_1-199601010-00003

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 244

Metadata

Authors
Kinlay, S., Leitch, J. W., Neil, A., Chapman, B. L., Hardy, D. B., & Fletcher, P. J.
Affiliations
John Hunter Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Kinlay, Scott
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
1996-01-01
Volume
124
Issue
1_Part_1
Pages
16-20
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2028013985
Cited by
245
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Keywords
Holter monitoring, cost-effectiveness, diagnostic yield, supraventricular tachycardia, atrial fibrillation, arrhythmia detection, transtelephonic monitoring, electrocardiogram
MeSH terms
Adult, Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Atrial Fibrillation, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Electrocardiography, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Electrocardiography, Ambulatory, Cross-Over Studies

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