Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
60 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2016-03-31
2018-08-27
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Secondary objectives of the study are to determine any significant differences in the two populations regarding:
1. Health care resource utilization including total charges for ED care.
2. Number of patients leaving the ED without being seen (LWBS) or left without the device interrogation completed.
3. Device related issues detected.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Comparison of Epicardial Versus Conventional Lead Placement in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy
NCT01302470
Safety and Effectiveness of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Conventional Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Heart Failure
NCT07069738
Correlating QLV Interval to Left Ventricular (LV) Lead Position in Patients Receiving Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.
NCT02166762
Empiric Versus Imaging Guided Left Ventricular Lead Placement in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy
NCT01323686
REsynchronization reVErses Remodeling in Systolic Left vEntricular Dysfunction (REVERSE)
NCT00271154
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Over the past 15 years the number of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) implanted has increased dramatically. This is due in part to the aging of the population in general, but primarily due to expanded indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), cardiac resynchronization pacemaker therapy (CRT-P) devices, and CRT devices with defibrillator capabilities ("biventricular ICDs" or CRT-D devices). As more patients with structural heart disease survive longer, and as more CIEDs are placed, the number of patients requiring treatment in the emergency departments for arrhythmias and potential device-related matters has increased.
When a patient with a CIED experiences a problem they presume to be cardiac in nature, they often go to the emergency room to seek care. Most emergency departments (ED) are neither equipped to interrogate the CIED, nor staffed with personnel trained to interrogate the CIED. These CIEDs often record data that can assist the physician in the formulation of a diagnostic and treatment strategy tailored to the specific needs of the patient. However, interrogation of the device is dependent on proprietary programming equipment that is not routinely kept in the emergency department. The programming equipment has traditionally been a "stand-alone" unit, which can store the data from the device interrogation (onto a USB drive or floppy disk), but does not have the capability to transmit the data to the patient's physician for rapid interpretation. In addition, ED personnel are not routinely trained to assess CIEDs. In most health care institutions, it is standard practice for a representative of the manufacturer to be contacted so the device can be evaluated. The representative must then travel to the ED with the programming equipment to interrogate the CIED on site. After interrogation, either the representative discusses the findings with the ED physician, or calls the physician that manages the patient's device. The process of in-person device evaluation can be cumbersome and inefficient, especially in an emergency setting. The time involved in the device interrogation process can cause delays in patient care and add unnecessary costs for the patient and health care institution.
Methods:
Patients with CIEDs will be evaluated in the ED setting. Patients will be divided into two cohorts. Each cohort will have a minimum of 50 patients.
The control group will include CIED patients who have been evaluated in the ED at The Heart Hospital Baylor Plano and Baylor Regional Medical Center at Plano. A minimum of 50 devices not compatible with the CareLink Express® system will be prospectively interrogated in the traditional evaluation method using the device manufacturer representative.
The study group will include CIED patients who present to the ED and receive a device evaluation using the CareLink Express® system. A minimum of 50 devices will be prospectively evaluated using CareLink Express®.
The patient's presenting symptoms in the ED include any medical conditions (not just cardiac).
Consent will be obtained from the subject after treatment has occurred in the ED and prior to release. Consent can be obtained from the subject or the subject's Legally Authorized Representative. This will ensure that treatment is not delayed or altered for research purposes.
Initial data will be collected using a Data Collection Form. The research staff or a research trained Emergency Department staff member will complete the Data Form.
Data will be collected by the research coordinators who will collect the Data Collection Forms from the ED at The Heart Hospital Baylor Plano and Baylor Regional Medical Center at Plano. The Data Collection Form will be used by the research coordinators to determine the patient's study cohort.
Other data will be collected by the research coordinators using the hospital EMR and Financial systems.
Data Collection:
Criteria for the hospital and ED encounters will be extracted from the hospital EMR, the Data Collection Form, or the hospital financial system. Device data will be extracted from the device report completed at the time of the device interrogation.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Control Group
The control group will include CIED patients who have been evaluated in the ED at The Heart Hospital Baylor Plano and Baylor Regional Medical Center at Plano. A minimum of 50 devices not compatible with the CareLink Express® system will be prospectively interrogated in the traditional evaluation method using the device manufacturer representative.
No interventions assigned to this group
CareLink Express
The study group will include CIED patients who present to the ED and receive a device evaluation using the CareLink Express® system. A minimum of 50 devices will be prospectively evaluated using CareLink Express®.
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
2. Patients referred to the ED from a physician's office or other health care facility where the CIED has already been interrogated or evaluated.
3. Patients in cardiac arrest or other life threatening situations.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Medtronic
INDUSTRY
Baylor Research Institute
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
015-234
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.