Abstract:Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Follow-up in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) is essential to avoid adverse events and complications, such as arrhythmias, device dysfunction, and infections, among other events. Prevention plays a fundamental role, especially when these patients undergo non-cardiological invasive tests and/or procedures (e.g., surgeries) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). These situations sometimes require the reprogramming of the device. In our Arrhythmia's Unit, after developing a healthcare management model based on the Lean methodology, 2 processes were identified that implied a reduction in activity, a threat to efficiency and a risk to patients who would undergo invasive non-cardiological procedures or MRI. One of them was a significant number of "urgent" consultations and calls to evaluate and/or reprogram CIED in patients that underwent invasive non-cardiological procedures the same day, many of them without indication of reprogramming according to the type of procedure. Another one was the increase in consultations of people with CIED who require MRI, was often contraindicated because it produces adverse effects on the patient and/or device. Objectives: To implement action protocols, depending on the type of device and dependant on stimulation, for patients with CIED who undergo surgery and invasive non-cardiac procedures and MRI. To evaluate the number of urgent calls and adverse events before and after implementation. Methods: A single-centre, not randomized study has been designed. A year before and after the implementation of the protocol the following variables were quantified a) number of urgent calls b) number of adverse events (persistence of the special programming of the device more than 24 h after the end of the procedure: asynchronous stimulation, ICD therapies off, CIED dysfunction or unnecessary programming). Two protocols were developed: a) management of CIED carriers undergoing invasive non-cardiological procedures according to recent clinical practice guidelines. b) risk of dysfunction after MRI based on type/compatibility with MRI of the device, implanted leads, and stimulation dependence, using a colour scale, from safe (in green) to high risk of dysfunction (in black) Pictures 1,2. The protocols for action in the anaesthesia and radiology services were disseminated through sessions given by the arrhythmia unit staff. Results: In the year prior to implementing the protocol, 185 urgent calls/year were quantified, (15.1 calls/month) and the number of adverse events was 4 (0.2 events/month). One year after the implementation of the protocol, urgent calls were reduced to 4calls/year, representing 0.33 calls/month (p <0.001) and there was an absence of adverse events (zero events/month). Conclusions. The implementation of protocols based on recent clinical practice guidelines can reduce urgent calls and adverse events related to reprogramming in our centre, thus increasing patient safety.

Utilization of remote reprogramming to manage insertable cardiac monitor arrhythmia alert burden

[Experiences of Applying Home Monitoring for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices].

Evaluation for the Usability of Carelink Remote Monitoring System by Clinical Physicians

Patient Acceptance of and Satisfaction with the Carelink Remote Monitoring System

Drowning in Data: Workflow Changes Improve the Collection of Clinically Relevant and Actionable Data

Scheduled versus alert transmissions for remote follow-up of cardiac implantable electronic devices: Clinical relevance and resource consumption

Rates of therapeutic interventions in a large real-world cohort with insertable cardiac monitors

Remote Monitoring: How to Maximize Efficiency through Appropriate Organization in a Device Clinic

The clinical use of remote parameter testing during cardiac implantable electronic devices implantation procedures: a single center, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial

Beyond nursing programming: preventing adverse events in patients with implantable cardiac devices undergoing invasive procedures and MRI after lean healthcare method

Abstract 15437: Use of Artificial Intelligence to Decrease Data Deluge From Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

Assessing adherence to remote monitoring recommendations for cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: a retrospective analysis

Utilization of the remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices in a diverse demographic cohort: Insights from a single-center observation

Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices using smart device interface versus radiofrequency-based interface: a systematic review

Alert-driven vs scheduled remote monitoring of implantable cardiac defibrillators: A cost-consequence analysis from the TRUST trial

Rationale and design of a prospective study of the efficacy of a remote monitoring system used in implantable cardioverter defibrillator follow-up: the Lumos-T Reduces Routine Office Device Follow-Up Study (TRUST) study

Automatic remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead and generator performance: the Lumos-T Safely RedUceS RouTine Office Device Follow-Up (TRUST) trial

Application value of remote device follow-up system in patients with implanted cardioverter defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator

Home monitoring in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator

Impact of a pharmacist-managed remote heart failure program in patients with a multisensor-capable implanted device