SUPPORT-AF: Piloting a Multi-Faceted, Electronic Medical Record-Based Intervention to Improve Prescription of Anticoagulation

Clinical decision support systems to optimize adherence to anticoagulant guidelines in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have been utilized as a low-cost intervention to improve healthcare process measures. Thus, we aim to estimate CDSS efficacy to optimize adherence to oral anticoagulant guidelines in eligible patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved from PubMed, WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and CENTRAL through August 2023. We used RevMan V. 5.4 to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

PROSPERO ID

CRD42023471806.

RESULTS

We included nine RCTs with a total of 25,573 patients. There was no significant difference, with the use of CDSS compared to routine care, in the number of patients prescribed anticoagulants (RR: 1.06, 95% CI [0.98, 1.14], P = 0.16), the number of patients prescribed antiplatelets (RR: 1.01 with 95% CI [0.97, 1.06], P = 0.59), all-cause mortality (RR: 1.19, 95% CI [0.31, 4.50], P = 0.80), major bleeding (RR: 0.84, 95% CI [0.21, 3.45], P = 0.81), and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR: 1.05, 95% CI [0.52, 2.16], P = 0.88). However, CDSS was significantly associated with reduced incidence of myocardial infarction (RR: 0.18, 95% CI [0.06, 0.54], P = 0.002) and cerebral or systemic embolic event (RR: 0.11, 95% CI [0.01, 0.83], P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

We report no significant difference with the use of CDSS compared to routine care in anticoagulant or antiplatelet prescription in eligible patients with AF. CDSS was associated with a reduced incidence of myocardial infarction and cerebral or systemic embolic events.

Atrial Fibrillation Associated with Heart Failure: Perspectives from Recent Large Clinical Studies and Translational Research

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major public health issue [...].

Preventing preventable strokes: A study protocol to push guideline-driven atrial fibrillation patient education via patient portal

Background

The main approach to preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is anticoagulation (AC), but only about 60% of at-risk individuals are on AC. Patient-facing electronic health record–based interventions have produced mixed results. Little is known about the impact of health portal–based messaging on AC use.

Objective

The purpose of this study was describe a protocol we will use to measure the association between AC use and patient portal message opening. We also will measure patient attitudes toward education materials housed on a professional society Web site.

Methods

We will send portal messages to patients aged ≥18 years with AF 1 week before an office/teleconference visit with a primary care or cardiology provider. The message will be customized for 3 groups of patients: those on AC; those at elevated risk but off AC; and those not currently at risk but may be at risk in the future. Within the message, we will embed a link to UpBeat.org, a Web site of the Heart Rhythm Society containing patient educational materials. We also will embed a link to a survey. Among other things, the survey will request patients to rate their attitude toward the Heart Rhythm Society Web pages. To measure the effectiveness of the intervention, we will track AC use and its association with message opening, adjusting for potential confounders.

Conclusion

If we detect an increase in AC use correlates with message opening, we will be well positioned to conduct a future comparative effectiveness trial. If patients rate the UpBeat.org materials highly, patients from other institutions also may benefit from receiving these materials.

Electronic health record-embedded decision support to reduce stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation - Study protocol

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common significant cardiac rhythm disorder and is a powerful common risk factor for stroke. Randomized trials have demonstrated that anticoagulation can reduce the risk of stroke in patients with AF. Yet, there continues to be widespread underutilization of this therapy. To address this practice gap locally and improve efforts to reduce the risk of stroke for patients with AF in our health system, we have designed a study to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool (AFDST) embedded within our electronic health record.

METHODS

Our intervention is provider-facing and focused on decision support. The clinical setting is ambulatory patients being seen by primary care physicians. Patients include those with both incident and prevalent AF. This randomized, prospective trial will enroll 800 patients in our University of Cincinnati Health System who are currently receiving less than optimal anticoagulation therapy as determined by the AFDST. Patients will be randomized to one of two arms - 1) usual care, in which the AFDST is available for use; 2) addition of a best practice advisory (BPA) to the AFDST notifying the clinician that their patient stands to gain a significant benefit from a change in their current thromboprophylactic therapy.

RESULTS

The primary outcome is effectiveness of the BPA measured by change to "appropriate thromboprophylaxis" based on the AFDST recommendation at 3 months post randomization. Secondary endpoints include Reach and Adoption, from the RE-AIM framework for implementation studies. Sample size is based upon an improvement from inappropriate to appropriate anticoagulation therapy estimated at 4% in the usual care arm and ≥10% in the experimental arm.

CONCLUSION

Our goal is to examine whether addition of a BPA to an AFDST focused on primary care physicians in an ambulatory care setting will improve "appropriate thromboprophylaxis" compared with usual care. Results will be examined at 3 months post randomization and at the end of the study to evaluate durability of changes. We expect to complete patient enrollment by the end of June 2022.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04099485.

SUPPORT-AF IV: Supporting use of AC through provider prompting about oral anticoagulation therapy for AF clinical trial study protocol

Background

Six million Americans suffer from atrial fibrillation (AF), a heart rhythm abnormality that significantly increases the risk of stroke. AF is responsible for 15% of ischemic strokes, which lead to permanent disability in 60% of cases and death in up to 20%. Anticoagulation (AC) is the mainstay for stroke prevention in patients with AF. Despite guidelines recommending AC for patients, up to half of eligible patients are not on AC. Clinical decision support tools in the electronic health record (EHR) can help bridge the disparity in AC prescription for patients with AF.

Objective

To enhance and assess the effectiveness of our previous rule-based alert on AC initiation and persistence in a diverse patient population from UMass-Memorial Medical Center and University of Florida at Jacksonville.

Methods/Results

Using the EHR, we will track AC initiation and persistence. We will interview both patients and providers to determine a measure of satisfaction with AC management. We will track digital crumbs to better understand the alert’s mechanism of effect and further add enhancements. These enhancements will be used to refine the alert and aid in developing an implementation toolkit to facilitate use of the alert at other health systems.

Conclusion

If the number of AC starts, the likelihood of persisting on AC, and the frequency alert use are found to be higher among intervention vs control providers, we believe such findings will confirm our hypothesis on the effectiveness of our alert.

Digital Health Interventions to Enhance Prevention in Primary Care: Scoping Review

Background

Disease prevention is a central aspect of primary care practice and is comprised of primary (eg, vaccinations), secondary (eg, screenings), tertiary (eg, chronic condition monitoring), and quaternary (eg, prevention of overmedicalization) levels. Despite rapid digital transformation of primary care practices, digital health interventions (DHIs) in preventive care have yet to be systematically evaluated.

Objective

This review aimed to identify and describe the scope and use of current DHIs for preventive care in primary care settings.

Methods

A scoping review to identify literature published from 2014 to 2020 was conducted across multiple databases using keywords and Medical Subject Headings terms covering primary care professionals, prevention and care management, and digital health. A subgroup analysis identified relevant studies conducted in US primary care settings, excluding DHIs that use the electronic health record (EHR) as a retrospective data capture tool. Technology descriptions, outcomes (eg, health care performance and implementation science), and study quality as per Oxford levels of evidence were abstracted.

Results

The search yielded 5274 citations, of which 1060 full-text articles were identified. Following a subgroup analysis, 241 articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies primarily examined DHIs among health information technologies, including EHRs (166/241, 68.9%), clinical decision support (88/241, 36.5%), telehealth (88/241, 36.5%), and multiple technologies (154/241, 63.9%). DHIs were predominantly used for tertiary prevention (131/241, 54.4%). Of the core primary care functions, comprehensiveness was addressed most frequently (213/241, 88.4%). DHI users were providers (205/241, 85.1%), patients (111/241, 46.1%), or multiple types (89/241, 36.9%). Reported outcomes were primarily clinical (179/241, 70.1%), and statistically significant improvements were common (192/241, 79.7%). Results were summarized across the following 5 topics for the most novel/distinct DHIs: population-centered, patient-centered, care access expansion, panel-centered (dashboarding), and application-driven DHIs. The quality of the included studies was moderate to low.

Conclusions

Preventive DHIs in primary care settings demonstrated meaningful improvements in both clinical and nonclinical outcomes, and across user types; however, adoption and implementation in the US were limited primarily to EHR platforms, and users were mainly clinicians receiving alerts regarding care management for their patients. Evaluations of negative results, effects on health disparities, and many other gaps remain to be explored.

Usability and Perceived Usefulness of the AFib 2gether Mobile App in a Clinical Setting: Single-Arm Intervention Study

Background

Although the American Heart Association and other professional societies have recommended shared decision-making as a way for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter to make informed decisions about using anticoagulation (AC), the best method for facilitating shared decision-making remains uncertain.

Objective

The aim of this study is to assess the AFib 2gether mobile app for usability, perceived usefulness, and the extent and nature of shared decision-making that occurred for clinical encounters between patients with AF and their cardiology providers in which the app was used.

Methods

We identified patients visiting a cardiology provider between October 2019 and May 2020. We measured usability from patients and providers using the Mobile App Rating Scale. From the 8 items of the Mobile App Rating Scale, we reported the average score (out of 5) for domains of functionality, esthetics, and overall quality. We administered a 3-item questionnaire to patients relating to their perceived usefulness of the app and a separate 3-item questionnaire to providers to measure their perceived usefulness of the app. We performed a chart review to track the occurrence of AC within 6 months of the index visit. We also audio recorded a subset of the encounters to identify evidence of shared decision-making.

Results

We facilitated shared decision-making visits for 37 patients visiting 13 providers. In terms of usability, patients’ average ratings of functionality, esthetics, and overall quality were 4.51 (SD 0.61), 4.26 (SD 0.51), and 4.24 (SD 0.89), respectively. In terms of usefulness, 41% (15/37) of patients agreed that the app improved their knowledge regarding AC, and 62% (23/37) agreed that the app helped clarify to their provider their preferences regarding AC. Among providers, 79% (27/34) agreed that the app helped clarify their patients’ preferences, 82% (28/34) agreed that the app saved them time, and 59% (20/34) agreed that the app helped their patients make decisions about AC. In addition, 32% (12/37) of patients started AC after their shared decision-making visits. We audio recorded 25 encounters. Of these, 84% (21/25) included the mention of AC for AF, 44% (11/25) included the discussion of multiple options for AC, 72% (18/25) included a provider recommendation for AC, and 48% (12/25) included the evidence of patient involvement in the discussion.

Conclusions

Patients and providers rated the app with high usability and perceived usefulness. Moreover, one-third of the patients began AC, and approximately 50% (12/25) of the encounters showed evidence of patient involvement in decision-making. In the future, we plan to study the effect of the app on a larger sample and with a controlled study design.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04118270; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04118270

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-21986

Geriatric Conditions Are Associated With Decreased Anticoagulation Use in Long-Term Care Residents With Atrial Fibrillation

Background

Anticoagulation is the mainstay for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, but concerns about bleeding inhibit its use in residents of long‐term care facilities. Risk‐profiling algorithms using comorbid disease information (eg, CHADS₂ and ATRIA [Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation]) have been available for years. In the long‐term care setting, however, providers and residents may place more value on geriatric conditions such as mobility impairment, activities of daily living dependency, cognitive impairment, low body mass index, weight loss, and fall history.

Methods and Results

Using a retrospective cohort design, we measured the association between geriatric conditions and anticoagulation use and type. After merging nursing home assessments containing information about geriatric conditions (Minimum Data Set 2015) with Medicare Part A 2014 to 2015 claims and prescription claims (Medicare Part D) 2015 to 2016, we identified 228 741 residents with atrial fibrillation and elevated stroke risk (CHA₂DS₂‐VASc score ≥2) for our main analysis. Recent fall, activities of daily living dependency, moderate and severe cognitive impairment, low body mass index, and unintentional weight loss were all associated with lower anticoagulation use even after adjustment for multiple predictors of stroke and bleeding (odds ratios ranging from 0.51 to 0.91). Residents with recent fall, low body mass index, and unintentional weight loss were more likely to be using a direct oral anticoagulant, although the magnitude of this effect was smaller.

Conclusions

Geriatric conditions were associated with lower anticoagulation use. Preventing stroke in these residents with potential for further physical and cognitive impairment would appear to be of paramount significance, although the net benefit of anticoagulation in these individuals warrants further research.

SUPPORT-AF III: supporting use of AC through provider prompting about oral anticoagulation therapy for AF

Only half of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with elevated stroke risk receive anticoagulation (AC). Electronic health record (EHR) alerts have the potential to close the gap. We designed an outpatient EHR alert (linked to an order set for ordering AC, labs, and specialty referrals) that fired when cardiology and primary care providers (PCPs) saw AF patients not on AC. We assigned all untreated patients seen by cardiology providers and PCPs in the 8 months before and after the alert launch to pre- and post-launch intervention cohorts, respectively. Untreated AF patients seeing other types of providers became controls. We then compared the difference in AC starts between intervention and control patients post-launch to the same difference prelaunch (adjusting for covariates). We measured alert responsiveness as how often patients had at least one encounter with a provider, who interacted with the alert. The adjusted percentage of AC starts for the prelaunch cohort was 20% for intervention patients and 17% for controls (difference = 3%); post-launch, the percentage was 13% for both post-launch intervention and controls (difference = 0%). The difference in difference was - 3% (p value 0.63). For half of patients, at least one provider was responsive to our alert. Reasons for no AC commonly included relative contraindications (e.g. fall, gastrointestinal bleed). Our alert did not increase AC starts but responsiveness to it was high. Increasing AC starts will likely require education surrounding relative contraindications.

US Antiarrhythmic Drug Treatment for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: An Insurance Claims-Based Report

Background

Current American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Rhythm Society guidelines and European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) for maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation. We assessed the concordance between healthcare provider real‐world practice and current guidelines with respect to first‐line AAD rhythm management.

Methods and Results

Administrative claims data from the deidentified Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database were used. Patients were included if they were initiated on an AAD in 2015 to 2016, had 1 year of continuous data availability before their first AAD pharmacy claim, and had a diagnosis for atrial fibrillation within that period. Concordance was assessed by comparing the AAD initiated by the healthcare provider against guideline recommendations for first‐line treatment, given the presence of heart failure, coronary artery disease, both, or neither (as determined by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision [ICD‐9 and ICD‐10] codes). Concordance was also assessed by provider type using Medicare taxonomy codes. For the 15 445 patients included, 51% of healthcare providers initiated AAD treatments with amiodarone, 18% flecainide, 15% sotalol, 8% dronedarone, 5% propafenone, and 2% dofetilide. The overall rate of guideline concordance was 61%, with differences by provider type: 67% for electrophysiologists, 61% for cardiologists, and 60% for others (internal medicine, etc).

Conclusions

There continues to be a sizable gap in concordance between practice and guidelines in first‐line rhythm management of patients with atrial fibrillation. Further research is needed to identify possible explanations for non–guideline‐recommended use of AADs, in addition to enhanced AAD educational strategies for practitioners.

Usability, Perceived Usefulness, and Shared Decision-Making Features of the AFib 2gether Mobile App: Protocol for a Single-Arm Intervention Study

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated that atrial fibrillation (AF) affects between 2.7 million and 6.1 million people in the United States. Those who have AF tend to have a much higher stroke risk than others. Although most individuals with AF benefit from anticoagulation (AC) therapy, a significant majority are hesitant to start it. To add, providers often struggle in helping patients negotiate the decision to start AC therapy. To assist in the communication between patients and providers regarding preferences and knowledge about AC therapy, different strategies are being used to try and solve this problem. In this research study, we will have patients and providers utilize the AFib 2gether app with hopes that it will create a platform for shared decision making regarding the prevention of stroke in patients with AF receiving AC therapy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study is to measure several outcomes related to encounters between patients and their cardiology providers where AFib 2gether is used. These outcomes include usability and perceived usefulness of the app from the perspective of patients and providers. In addition, we will assess the extent and nature of shared decision making.

METHODS

Eligible patients and providers will evaluate the AFib 2gether mobile app for usability and perceived usefulness in facilitating shared decision making regarding understanding the patient's risk of stroke and whether or not to start AC therapy. Both patients and providers will review the app and complete multiple questionnaires about the usability and perceived usefulness of the mobile app in a clinical setting. We will also audio-record a subset of encounters to assess for evidence of shared decision making.

RESULTS

Enrollment in the AFib 2gether shared decision-making study is still ongoing for both patients and providers. The first participant enrolled on November 22, 2019. Analysis and publishing of results are expected to be completed in spring 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

The AFib 2gether app emerged from a desire to increase the ability of patients and providers to engage in shared decision making around understanding the risk of stroke and AC therapy. We anticipate that the AFib 2gether mobile app will facilitate patient discussion with their cardiologist and other providers. Additionally, we hope the study will help us identify barriers that providers face when placing patients on AC therapy. We aim to demonstrate the usability and perceived usefulness of the app with a future goal of testing the value of our approach in a larger sample of patients and providers at multiple medical centers across the country.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04118270; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04118270.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/21986.

[Results of decision support system implementation for prescribing anticoagulants to patients with atrial fibrillation in hospital]

BACKGROUND

In 819% of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with anticoagulant therapy (ACT), hemorrhagic complications occur, including due to excess doses of AC. At the same time, ACT is necessary for patients with AF, since anticoagulants effectively reduces the risk of ischemic stroke. To make a decision on the appointment of ACT, it is necessary to correlate the risks of ischemic stroke and bleeding, this requires knowledge of current clinical using ACT recommendations and instructions. Among patients admitted to hospital, 30% receive ACT, so increasing adherence to clinical recommendations for prescribing AC to patients with AF by doctors of various profiles is an urgent task.

AIM

To analyze the adherence of physicians to recommendations for prescribing ACT before and after the introduction of decision support system (DSS) in patients with AF in a multi-specialty hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center non-randomized study with historical control to assess adherence to recommendations based on the analysis of medical prescriptions and the structure of drug errors in patients with AF in a multi-specialty hospital in Moscow before and after the introduction of DSS. Compliance with the recommendations of physicians was evaluated in the sections indications /contraindications to AC and dosage regimen of AC. The presence of deviations from the clinical recommendations /instructions for medical use of AC was regarded as management of the patient with non-compliance with recommendations. Physicians adherence level to recommendations was calculated as the ratio of cases of compliance with recommendations to the total number of cases.

RESULTS

In the control and experimental groups, there was a significant increase in the proportion of POAC at discharge in comparison with admission to hospital: from 54.5 to 76.8% (p=0.0005) and from 63 to 85.7% (p=0.0002), respectively. However, only in the experimental group it was possible to significantly reduce the number of patients without a prescribed ACT (if there are indications) from 7.6 to 1% (p=0.04) in comparison with admission. During the study, it was possible to significantly increase physicians adherence level to the recommendations for the AC dosage regimen in patients with AF from 59% (44 discrepancies for 107 prescriptions) to 84.6% (16 discrepancies for 104 prescriptions); p0.005. Before the introduction of the DSS, the analysis of drug prescriptions revealed 56 drug errors (0.5 errors per patient), after the introduction of the DSS, the number of drug errors significantly decreased to 21 (0.2 errors per patient); p0.05. After the introduction of DSS, the number of sub-therapeutic doses of AC was reduced from 31 (27.7%) to 8 (7.6%); p0.05.

CONCLUSION

The level of adherence to the recommendations for prescribing ACT to patients with AF in the hospital is high. The use of DSS increases the level of adherence to the recommendations on the AC dosage regimen in patients with AF, as well as eliminates errors in calculating the risk of ischemic stroke and systemic thromboembolic complications, and contributes to reducing the frequency of prescribing sub-therapeutic doses of AC.

Supporting anticoagulant treatment decision making to optimise stroke prevention in complex patients with atrial fibrillation: a cluster randomised trial

Background

Anticoagulation for preventing stroke in atrial fibrillation is under-utilised despite evidence supporting its use, resulting in avoidable death and disability. We aimed to evaluate an intervention to improve the uptake of anticoagulation.

Methods

We carried out a national, cluster randomised controlled trial in the Australian primary health care setting. General practitioners received an educational session, delivered via telephone by a medical peer and provided information about their patients selected either because they were not receiving anticoagulation or for whom anticoagulation was considered challenging. General practitioners were randomised to receive feedback from a medical specialist about the cases (expert decisional support) either before or after completing a post-test audit. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients reported as receiving oral anticoagulation. A secondary outcome assessed antithrombotic treatment as appropriate against guideline recommendations.

Results

One hundred and seventy-nine general practitioners participated in the trial, contributing information about 590 cases. At post-test, 152 general practitioners (84.9%) completed data collection on 497 cases (84.2%). A 4.6% (Adjusted Relative Risk = 1.11, 95% CI = 0.86–1.43) difference in the post-test utilization of anticoagulation between groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.42). Sixty-one percent of patients in both groups received appropriate antithrombotic management according to evidence-based guidelines at post-test (Adjusted Relative Risk = 1.0; 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.19) (p = 0.97).

Conclusions

Specialist feed-back in addition to an educational session did not increase the uptake of anticoagulation in patients with AF.

Trial registration

ANZCTRN12611000076976 Retrospectively registered.

SUPPORT-AF II: Supporting Use of Anticoagulants Through Provider Profiling of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation

Background:

Previous provider-directed electronic messaging interventions have not by themselves improved anticoagulation use in patients with atrial fibrillation. Direct engagement with providers using academic detailing coupled with electronic messaging may overcome the limitations of the prior interventions.

Methods and Results:

We randomized outpatient providers affiliated with our health system in a 2.5:1 ratio to our electronic profiling/messaging combined with academic detailing intervention. In the intervention, we emailed providers monthly reports of their anticoagulation percentage relative to peers for atrial fibrillation patients with elevated stroke risk (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥2). We also sent electronic medical record-based messages shortly before an appointment with an anticoagulation-eligible but untreated atrial fibrillation patient. Providers had the option to send responses with explanations for prescribing decisions. We also offered to meet with intervention providers using an academic detailing approach developed based on knowledge gaps discussed in provider focus groups. To assess feasibility, we tracked provider review of our messages. To assess effectiveness, we measured the change in anticoagulation for patients of intervention providers relative to controls. We identified 85 intervention and 34 control providers taking care of 3591 and 1908 patients, respectively; 33 intervention providers participated in academic detailing. More than 80% of intervention providers read our emails, and 98% of the time a provider reviewed our in-basket messages. Replies to messages identified patient refusal as the most common reason for patients not being on anticoagulation (11.2%). For the group of patients not on anticoagulation at baseline assigned to an intervention versus control provider, the adjusted percent increase in the use of anticoagulation over 6 months was 5.2% versus 7.4%, respectively ( P =0.21).

Conclusions:

Our electronic messaging and academic detailing intervention was feasible but did not increase anticoagulation use. Patient-directed interventions or provider interventions targeting patients declining anticoagulation may be necessary to raise the rate of anticoagulation.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03583008.

Wearing Your Heart on Your Sleeve: the Future of Cardiac Rhythm Monitoring

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review describes the novel category of wearable ECG monitors and identifies where patients, healthcare providers, and device manufacturers should focus efforts to maximize the clinical benefit of these devices.

RECENT FINDINGS

Notable wearable ECG monitors include the AliveCor Kardia devices, Apple Watch Series 4, and several others. The most common use case is monitoring for atrial fibrillation. The available evidence validates the ability of the Kardia devices and Apple Watch to distinguish atrial fibrillation from sinus rhythm. Key questions for manufacturers include how to calibrate each device's algorithms and streamline workflows for healthcare providers. Wearable ECG monitors are currently most useful to detect atrial fibrillation. Further study is needed to demonstrate whether wearable ECG monitors improve patient outcomes, and to expand their use into other indications. Device manufacturers and healthcare providers must work together to establish new workflows to process and act on wearable ECG data.