The mHealth Screening To Prevent Strokes (mSToPS) randomised clinical trial showed that home-based wearable electrocardiogram (EKG) sensor patch monitoring, compared with delayed monitoring, resulted in a higher rate of atrial fibrillation (AF) diagnosis after four months. Wearing an ECG patch (Zio, iRhythm) for two weeks was equivalent to 12 months of fortnightly monitoring.
Bob-would you explain this to me. I don’t understand what the conclusion of the report is. Are these monitors causing A-AFib to worsen? I am sadly confused.
It’s just a small monitor you wear - it’s about the size of an Elastoplast so quite revolutionary. They’ve been used in the US routinely for a few years but good old U.K. still use the clumsy holter monitors for 24 hours or 7 days which is often not long enough to capture AF episodes if you have PAF.
Not at all. They are a small patch which works like a holter monitor . The point of the article is that they can spot far more AF and allow proper diagnosis much quicker than the old fashioned units.
I'm just being curious here, does anyone know what communication method this device uses? The advertising suggests that it communicates direct with a 'National database'. It's possible it uses the cell phone network direct, but I would have thought that was unlikely from such a small device.
''After you have worn the Zio monitor for the duration prescribed by your doctor, you’ll need to remove it and mail it back to iRhythm in the provided box. Please send your monitor promptly to ensure that your doctor receives your heart rhythm data as quickly as possible.''
So it looks like you wear the patch for a couple of weeks then send it back to have the recorded data analysed. The patient also logs the symptoms on an app when the device is pressed to record. a noticed episode
Thanks doodle. I scanned the advertising blurb, but missed that. So yes, not that different and also similar to the Holter monitor, but small, light and neat. You can also wear it in the shower (apparently)!
Duh. Of course, one would expect continuous monitoring to more often detect AFIB then a periodic 24 hour monitor. Not exactly a ground breaking study in my opinion, just common sense.
I wore this monitor for two weeks in January. It is a vast improvement over Holter monitor. You carry a cell phone type device, which communicates with the monitor that is strapped to your chest for two weeks.
The cell phone type device periodically sends data from the monitor to the company's database. That data is continually monitored by algorithms, and if a reading is considered dangerous, a text message is sent immediately to your EP/MD.
Additionally, your EP/MD receives a report from the Company daily showing all activity.
There is a button on the chest monitor that you are supposed to push if you feel like you are having a Fib or Flutter event. That helps identify events which you notice vs. one's that occur but you do not detect.
In my case, after only a week my EP called me and said - I already have what I need to know, so you can quit wearing it for second week, if you want. We knew that I had Flutter events, but he suspected I may have Afib as well...and if so wanted to address both in one ablation procedure, rather than 2 separate ablations.
The monitor disclosed that, in fact, I did have Afib...but the only "event" I really noticed and "pushed the button" to acknowledge was a Flutter event. There were several Afib events that only the monitor detected.
I continued wearing it a second week, just to see if there was any further meaningful data, but was not.
You can shower with the monitor in place, just need to protect it from a lot of direct water contact. Although have to carry around the cell phone like device, or keep it near you...like on a night stand while sleeping...it is lightweight, has a belt clip, and is really like just carrying a second cell phone.
Wore a Holter monitor for 3 days a few years back...this is a massive improvement. Very impressive technology.
While the Company (Irhythm) requests that you return the monitor to them at completion of test, my EP said that was optional since he already had all the data accessible online from their servers, and in daily reports.
Guessing Company requests return so that they can do quality control checks, e.g. confirm that what was recorded on the device is the same data that was sent to them wirelessly and provided to the EP/MD. Suppose they could be recycling some of the parts to use in new devices...but probably not permitted. They provide a postage free return envelope, so I returned mine to them.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Charity concerned that new NICE guideline published today will delay diagnosis of AF
Altitude in Tenerife no AF lots of Wine coming Home no Wine 
When to take bisoprolol ?
Personal Cardiac Moderators (ECG)
