Remote Perioperative Monitoring in Adult Cardiac Surgery: The Impact on 1000 Consecutive Patients
Our remote patient monitoring (RPM) program for adult cardiac surgery patients aims to remove barriers to access, provide continuity of expert care, and increase their time-at-home. The RPM program integrates novel biosensors, an application for audiovisual visits, messaging, biometric data tracking...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of thoracic surgery short reports 2024-12, Vol.2 (4), p.860-864 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 864 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 860 |
container_title | Annals of thoracic surgery short reports |
container_volume | 2 |
creator | Lobdell, Kevin W. Crotwell, Shannon Watts, Larry T. LeNoir, Bradley Skipper, Eric R. Maxey, Thomas Russell, Gregory B. Habib, Robert Rose, Geoffrey A. Frederick, John |
description | Our remote patient monitoring (RPM) program for adult cardiac surgery patients aims to remove barriers to access, provide continuity of expert care, and increase their time-at-home. The RPM program integrates novel biosensors, an application for audiovisual visits, messaging, biometric data tracking, patient-reported outcomes, and scheduling with the aim of reducing postoperative length of stay and 30-day readmissions, while simultaneously increasing the rate of patients discharged to home.
Our institutional database was utilized for this retrospective review of 1000 consecutive RPM patients who underwent coronary artery bypass, valve, and coronary artery bypass + valve, at 3 hospitals from July 2019 through April 2023. The study cohort was compared with 1000 propensity-matched controls from the same three hospitals (1:1, nearest neighbor matching where propensity scores were generated with RPM as the outcome measure). Patient characteristics, procedures, and outcomes are defined as per The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Database.
RPM patients experienced statistically significant shorter median postoperative length of stay (1 day less, a 16.7% relative difference; P < .0001) and a 33% relative reduction in 30-day readmission (7.0 ± 0.8 vs 4.7 ± 0.7, P = .027), while 5.6% more patients were discharged to home (97.8% vs 92.2%, P < .0001) when compared with the non-RPM cohort.
Patient engagement and management with a RPM platform are feasible and associated with significantly shorter postoperative length of stay, fewer 30-day readmissions, and an increased rate of discharge to home.
[Display omitted] |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.atssr.2024.06.018 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11708505</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S2772993124002614</els_id><sourcerecordid>3153919690</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2105-2b24b745e071ce693f4181689598f8f89575fccacc8bbfc9ebc006bf64b32b873</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kdFrFDEQxoMottT-BYLk0ZfbTjabzUYQKYfaQsWi9Tkk2dlrjt3NmWQP-t-b9mqpLzIPGcg33zfMj5C3DCoGrD3bVianFKsa6qaCtgLWvSDHtZT1SinOXj7rj8hpSlsA4ACdVOI1OeJKKhCKHRPzA6eQkV5j9GGH0WS_R_otzD6H6OcN9TM975cx07WJvTeO_lziBuPdB3pzi_Ry2hmXaZgpKwF0HeaEbnnwuC5WOOf0hrwazJjw9PE9Ib--fL5ZX6yuvn-9XJ9frVzNQKxqWzdWNgJBMoet4kPDOtZ2SqhuKKWEFINzxrnO2sEptA6gtUPbWF7bTvIT8ungu1vshL0r2dGMehf9ZOKdDsbrf39mf6s3Ya8Zk9AJEMXh_aNDDL8XTFlPPjkcRzNjWJLmTHDFVKugSPlB6mIoGHB4ymGg7wHprX4ApO8BaWh1AVSm3j1f8WnmL44i-HgQYDnU3mPUyZUjOux9RJd1H_x_A_4AGBijqA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3153919690</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Remote Perioperative Monitoring in Adult Cardiac Surgery: The Impact on 1000 Consecutive Patients</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Lobdell, Kevin W. ; Crotwell, Shannon ; Watts, Larry T. ; LeNoir, Bradley ; Skipper, Eric R. ; Maxey, Thomas ; Russell, Gregory B. ; Habib, Robert ; Rose, Geoffrey A. ; Frederick, John</creator><creatorcontrib>Lobdell, Kevin W. ; Crotwell, Shannon ; Watts, Larry T. ; LeNoir, Bradley ; Skipper, Eric R. ; Maxey, Thomas ; Russell, Gregory B. ; Habib, Robert ; Rose, Geoffrey A. ; Frederick, John</creatorcontrib><description>Our remote patient monitoring (RPM) program for adult cardiac surgery patients aims to remove barriers to access, provide continuity of expert care, and increase their time-at-home. The RPM program integrates novel biosensors, an application for audiovisual visits, messaging, biometric data tracking, patient-reported outcomes, and scheduling with the aim of reducing postoperative length of stay and 30-day readmissions, while simultaneously increasing the rate of patients discharged to home.
Our institutional database was utilized for this retrospective review of 1000 consecutive RPM patients who underwent coronary artery bypass, valve, and coronary artery bypass + valve, at 3 hospitals from July 2019 through April 2023. The study cohort was compared with 1000 propensity-matched controls from the same three hospitals (1:1, nearest neighbor matching where propensity scores were generated with RPM as the outcome measure). Patient characteristics, procedures, and outcomes are defined as per The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Database.
RPM patients experienced statistically significant shorter median postoperative length of stay (1 day less, a 16.7% relative difference; P < .0001) and a 33% relative reduction in 30-day readmission (7.0 ± 0.8 vs 4.7 ± 0.7, P = .027), while 5.6% more patients were discharged to home (97.8% vs 92.2%, P < .0001) when compared with the non-RPM cohort.
Patient engagement and management with a RPM platform are feasible and associated with significantly shorter postoperative length of stay, fewer 30-day readmissions, and an increased rate of discharge to home.
[Display omitted]</description><identifier>ISSN: 2772-9931</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2772-9931</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.atssr.2024.06.018</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39790591</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Perioperative & Critical Care</subject><ispartof>Annals of thoracic surgery short reports, 2024-12, Vol.2 (4), p.860-864</ispartof><rights>2024 The Author(s)</rights><rights>2024 The Author(s).</rights><rights>2024 The Author(s) 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2105-2b24b745e071ce693f4181689598f8f89575fccacc8bbfc9ebc006bf64b32b873</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5509-4732</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,860,881,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39790591$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lobdell, Kevin W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crotwell, Shannon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Watts, Larry T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LeNoir, Bradley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skipper, Eric R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maxey, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russell, Gregory B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Habib, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rose, Geoffrey A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frederick, John</creatorcontrib><title>Remote Perioperative Monitoring in Adult Cardiac Surgery: The Impact on 1000 Consecutive Patients</title><title>Annals of thoracic surgery short reports</title><addtitle>Ann Thorac Surg Short Rep</addtitle><description>Our remote patient monitoring (RPM) program for adult cardiac surgery patients aims to remove barriers to access, provide continuity of expert care, and increase their time-at-home. The RPM program integrates novel biosensors, an application for audiovisual visits, messaging, biometric data tracking, patient-reported outcomes, and scheduling with the aim of reducing postoperative length of stay and 30-day readmissions, while simultaneously increasing the rate of patients discharged to home.
Our institutional database was utilized for this retrospective review of 1000 consecutive RPM patients who underwent coronary artery bypass, valve, and coronary artery bypass + valve, at 3 hospitals from July 2019 through April 2023. The study cohort was compared with 1000 propensity-matched controls from the same three hospitals (1:1, nearest neighbor matching where propensity scores were generated with RPM as the outcome measure). Patient characteristics, procedures, and outcomes are defined as per The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Database.
RPM patients experienced statistically significant shorter median postoperative length of stay (1 day less, a 16.7% relative difference; P < .0001) and a 33% relative reduction in 30-day readmission (7.0 ± 0.8 vs 4.7 ± 0.7, P = .027), while 5.6% more patients were discharged to home (97.8% vs 92.2%, P < .0001) when compared with the non-RPM cohort.
Patient engagement and management with a RPM platform are feasible and associated with significantly shorter postoperative length of stay, fewer 30-day readmissions, and an increased rate of discharge to home.
[Display omitted]</description><subject>Perioperative & Critical Care</subject><issn>2772-9931</issn><issn>2772-9931</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kdFrFDEQxoMottT-BYLk0ZfbTjabzUYQKYfaQsWi9Tkk2dlrjt3NmWQP-t-b9mqpLzIPGcg33zfMj5C3DCoGrD3bVianFKsa6qaCtgLWvSDHtZT1SinOXj7rj8hpSlsA4ACdVOI1OeJKKhCKHRPzA6eQkV5j9GGH0WS_R_otzD6H6OcN9TM975cx07WJvTeO_lziBuPdB3pzi_Ry2hmXaZgpKwF0HeaEbnnwuC5WOOf0hrwazJjw9PE9Ib--fL5ZX6yuvn-9XJ9frVzNQKxqWzdWNgJBMoet4kPDOtZ2SqhuKKWEFINzxrnO2sEptA6gtUPbWF7bTvIT8ungu1vshL0r2dGMehf9ZOKdDsbrf39mf6s3Ya8Zk9AJEMXh_aNDDL8XTFlPPjkcRzNjWJLmTHDFVKugSPlB6mIoGHB4ymGg7wHprX4ApO8BaWh1AVSm3j1f8WnmL44i-HgQYDnU3mPUyZUjOux9RJd1H_x_A_4AGBijqA</recordid><startdate>202412</startdate><enddate>202412</enddate><creator>Lobdell, Kevin W.</creator><creator>Crotwell, Shannon</creator><creator>Watts, Larry T.</creator><creator>LeNoir, Bradley</creator><creator>Skipper, Eric R.</creator><creator>Maxey, Thomas</creator><creator>Russell, Gregory B.</creator><creator>Habib, Robert</creator><creator>Rose, Geoffrey A.</creator><creator>Frederick, John</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5509-4732</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202412</creationdate><title>Remote Perioperative Monitoring in Adult Cardiac Surgery: The Impact on 1000 Consecutive Patients</title><author>Lobdell, Kevin W. ; Crotwell, Shannon ; Watts, Larry T. ; LeNoir, Bradley ; Skipper, Eric R. ; Maxey, Thomas ; Russell, Gregory B. ; Habib, Robert ; Rose, Geoffrey A. ; Frederick, John</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2105-2b24b745e071ce693f4181689598f8f89575fccacc8bbfc9ebc006bf64b32b873</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Perioperative & Critical Care</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lobdell, Kevin W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crotwell, Shannon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Watts, Larry T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LeNoir, Bradley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skipper, Eric R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maxey, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russell, Gregory B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Habib, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rose, Geoffrey A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frederick, John</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Annals of thoracic surgery short reports</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lobdell, Kevin W.</au><au>Crotwell, Shannon</au><au>Watts, Larry T.</au><au>LeNoir, Bradley</au><au>Skipper, Eric R.</au><au>Maxey, Thomas</au><au>Russell, Gregory B.</au><au>Habib, Robert</au><au>Rose, Geoffrey A.</au><au>Frederick, John</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Remote Perioperative Monitoring in Adult Cardiac Surgery: The Impact on 1000 Consecutive Patients</atitle><jtitle>Annals of thoracic surgery short reports</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Thorac Surg Short Rep</addtitle><date>2024-12</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>2</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>860</spage><epage>864</epage><pages>860-864</pages><issn>2772-9931</issn><eissn>2772-9931</eissn><abstract>Our remote patient monitoring (RPM) program for adult cardiac surgery patients aims to remove barriers to access, provide continuity of expert care, and increase their time-at-home. The RPM program integrates novel biosensors, an application for audiovisual visits, messaging, biometric data tracking, patient-reported outcomes, and scheduling with the aim of reducing postoperative length of stay and 30-day readmissions, while simultaneously increasing the rate of patients discharged to home.
Our institutional database was utilized for this retrospective review of 1000 consecutive RPM patients who underwent coronary artery bypass, valve, and coronary artery bypass + valve, at 3 hospitals from July 2019 through April 2023. The study cohort was compared with 1000 propensity-matched controls from the same three hospitals (1:1, nearest neighbor matching where propensity scores were generated with RPM as the outcome measure). Patient characteristics, procedures, and outcomes are defined as per The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Database.
RPM patients experienced statistically significant shorter median postoperative length of stay (1 day less, a 16.7% relative difference; P < .0001) and a 33% relative reduction in 30-day readmission (7.0 ± 0.8 vs 4.7 ± 0.7, P = .027), while 5.6% more patients were discharged to home (97.8% vs 92.2%, P < .0001) when compared with the non-RPM cohort.
Patient engagement and management with a RPM platform are feasible and associated with significantly shorter postoperative length of stay, fewer 30-day readmissions, and an increased rate of discharge to home.
[Display omitted]</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>39790591</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.atssr.2024.06.018</doi><tpages>5</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5509-4732</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2772-9931 |
ispartof | Annals of thoracic surgery short reports, 2024-12, Vol.2 (4), p.860-864 |
issn | 2772-9931 2772-9931 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11708505 |
source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Perioperative & Critical Care |
title | Remote Perioperative Monitoring in Adult Cardiac Surgery: The Impact on 1000 Consecutive Patients |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T16%3A47%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Remote%20Perioperative%20Monitoring%20in%20Adult%20Cardiac%20Surgery:%20The%20Impact%20on%201000%20Consecutive%20Patients&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20thoracic%20surgery%20short%20reports&rft.au=Lobdell,%20Kevin%20W.&rft.date=2024-12&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=860&rft.epage=864&rft.pages=860-864&rft.issn=2772-9931&rft.eissn=2772-9931&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.atssr.2024.06.018&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3153919690%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3153919690&rft_id=info:pmid/39790591&rft_els_id=S2772993124002614&rfr_iscdi=true |