Kardia 6L subscription service benefits?

[Chinkoflight]

Hi, I was wondering how useful and/or value for money the paid for Kardia service for a 6lead monitor is? Can anyone share their experience of the quality and usefulness of feedback?I am monitored at a low level or after the event yet to happen level by my general hospital EP's , from a two lead ICD device remote report at three months. This is a desk job without face to face contact or even guaranteed feedback. I am aware from seeing my most recent ECG hospital trace that I have left anterior fascicular block reported in the summary analysis and I would like to know more about this.

Throughout my hospital stay I was only made aware of checking for ventricular tachycardia and was never made aware of the above information in any feedback about general heart electrophysiology.

I would hope to understand this a little better from providing regular Kardia traces to an independent source. But will I get granular detail?

[scentedgardener]

I asked my cardiologist if it was worth paying for this service and he said it wasn't, but I went ahead and did it anyway, for a variety of reasons.It's worth remembering that a Kardia is primarily designed for atrial fibrillation, not a diagnostic tool for all heart issues.

I had ECGs taken by paramedics and in A&E, saw about 7 different people, paramedics, senior nurses and doctors who all told me it was showing atrial flutter. I had asked for a copy of the ECG, and took it with me to my appointment with my cardiologist's registrar. He said no, it wasn't flutter it was AF, so I can only deduce that ECGs are open to interpretation and opinions may vary.

I did show the Kardia ECGs on my phone to the arrthymia nurse who found them helpful.

[Chinkoflight in reply to scentedgardener]

Hi thanks for the helpful reply. Good point re the primary purpose of a Kardia and I am looking for analysis beyond the basic diagnosis which is all I've ever been given. Every doctor had a different opinion on a diagnosis but they all had the same idea re treatment which essentially was all they had time to do or make time to do such was the pressure. I had always hoped a junior would be delegated to fill in the gaps but they all seemed to live in fear of the consultants. Because I'd had a recorded and dangerous LVT leading to a sudden cardiac arrest the business of analysing the 7 weeks worth of ECG data was never discussed. It was only when I was given a trace from my device revision procedure with my discharge summary I realised I had an ongoing permanent problem and that's what I am considering monitoring. It's probably unrealistic and unlikely to change future outcomes or treatment.

[scentedgardener in reply to Chinkoflight]

I'm glad you found my reply helpful. Is it within your means to pay for a private appointment and take with you the trace you have? You can then ask questions about what, ideally, should happen next, etc, and if you manage to see someone who sees NHS and private patients you could then go on their NHS list.I'm personally am not in a position to use private treatment but I will consider a private appointment if it gets me the answers I need.

Also you could look up the NICE guidelines that cover your issue and see what should be happening.

[Chinkoflight in reply to scentedgardener]

I think if I'd been in a teaching/specialist hospital cardiology unit I would have routinely had more extensive testing. The cardiac MRI from Oxford made recommendations but the 'attitude' of my local referring general hospital(used advisedly) was tests would make no difference to the primary treatment to fit an ICD. I think there is a possibility that opportunities to intervene by my local GH before the SCA in January were missed. My experience is that devices are fitted but the resource to monitor them is possibly inadequate. When you are dependent for treatment whatever you think, you need the people with the skills on your side when it matters. However, if I need more treatment/investigations my GP has said he will make a future referral to a hospital of my choice although he can't influence any waiting list. He said he is no longer referring his patients to our local hospital! The suggestion by Oxford not followed up was to further investigate either non ischaemic or embolic causes of my LVT and ventricular scarring and thinning. Although my pipes are working well for my age, the possibility of calcification/atherosclerosis might be consistent with an embolic cause from my research. But given I'm 'protected' now by medication and the ICD this investigation is beyond the skillset, resource and equipment of my GH. I think this type of investigation would be prohibitive privately. I also reluctantly accept that resources in the NHS are scarce and subject to a bit of a post code lottery, and cost benefit is a calculation that is used. There is also a downside to going down the rabbit hole of researching your own health. If there had been a simple way to mark where I am now in order track my condition for the future then I'd take it. I'm grateful to be 'fit again' for now, and need to get back into a more normal routine which if nothing else will help mental health and those around me!

It's a continuing challenge and I'm grateful to HealthUnlocked and the members for the sounding board I occasionally feel the need to use. (A bit at length.....)

[scentedgardener in reply to Chinkoflight]

Yes, we are rather between a rock and a hard place when it comes to health care.I didn't mean to have investigations privately, just a consultation to review what has happened to date, and an opinion on what should happen now, with attention paid to what would be your best course of action/treatment, not a generalised view.

My local hospital is poor in many areas, not just my opinion but also the one held by the CQC. I will probably need surgery, not heart related but contributing to heart issues, and I have picked who I will see, in a different area, and I can get a referral on the NHS. In this specialism the consultant is really abysmal, so I really don't need her on my side, and on my next appointment I will be presenting her with the information I have gathered from the relevant NICE guidelines, and asking her to tell me why she isn't following them.

I am always prepared to listen, I can understand that the gold standard of tests/treatment/operations/ therapies may not be the best course of action for me and my particular circumstances, and there are others who could well be more seriously unwell, there are financial constraints, etc, but I won't have them gaslighting me.

Good luck

[Lexi72]

hi I recently bought the 6 lead Kardia. I had to pay for the subscription as I wanted the device to work out if my ventricular ectopics weee triggered by anything in particular or were just being triggered all the time. I cannot feel them and before my recent ablation had a 20 per cent load confirmed by the cardiologist with a 24 hour holter. The ventricular ectopic report is one of the two readings (out of the 6 covered by the Kardia) You also get 4 reviews of the ECG each year included in the subscription by an ECG technician and can pay for more at 9.99 a go. If your condition does not fit within one of the 6 standard conditions picked up by the algorithm it would be really difficult to interpret without help from a specialist. The technical report on the sample ECG I sent in just confirmed the conclusion from the Kardia that I had PVE beats.In my case it did not add much more other than reassrance about the result from the algorithm .As mentioned already the Kardia seems most useful for picking up occasional arrhythmias or events which may not be picked up with a 24 hour or longer ECGs. It is a nice toy and in my case it has confirmed what I suspected that premature ventricular ectopics are still there after my ablation and linked to caffeine and alcohol The Kardia is a nice toy but in an ideal world you would obtain input from an electrophysiologist who can order appropriate tests and advise you on the implications of your earlier ECG result Best wishes

[Chinkoflight in reply to Lexi72]

That's really helpful Lexi. The opinion all seems to say the reports will be very general. I can spot ectopics and I'm not so concerned about them. I saw a revolving door of cardiologists in my seven weeks stay and complete inconsistency in message. But two throw away lines were sent at me, "you've had a silent heart attack" and " your heart stopped for three seconds last July", without any offer to expand. I guess those remarks and the ECG trace with the summary explanation leave me with uncertainty quite apart from the LVT!