Abstract 4115684: Outcomes Associated with Remote Monitoring without In-person Evaluations for Patients with Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices

Introduction: Traditionally, patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs: pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators) attend in-person visits at least annually, paired with remote monitoring (RM). Because similar data are obtained through RM and in-person visits, it is unclear whether routine in-person visits are necessary. Two small trials conducted outside the U.S. found no difference in clinical outcomes without routine in-person visits for patients engaged in RM, but their generalizability is uncertain. Research Aim: To determine whether routine visits for CIED care are associated with major adverse cardiac events (MACE) among patients in the U.S.’ largest public integrated health system, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Methods: We classified Veterans who received their CIED care within VHA and sent ≥1 RM transmission between 7/1/20-6/30/21 into one of three groups based on type of clinical encounters for CIED care: (1) any in-person, (2) virtual-only (telephone and/or videoconference), or (3) no in-person or virtual visits. Data were obtained from the VHA National Cardiac Device Surveillance Program and Corporate Data Warehouse. The primary outcome was MACE, a composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, and cardiac hospitalization, between 7/1/21-6/30/22. We performed multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for patient and device characteristics. Results: Of 40,366 patients, 27,298 (68%) had at least one in-person visit, 9,268 (23%) had only virtual visits, and 3,800 (9%) had neither. Mean age was 73 years, 97% were male, and 37% lived in rural areas. There were 6522 (23.9%) MACE events among patients who had in-person visits, 2116 (22.8%) among those who had only virtual visits, and 947 (24.9%) among those who had no visits. After multivariable adjustment, there was no significant association between encounter type and MACE [odds ratio 0.93 (95% CI: 0.85-1.01) for patients who had any in-person or virtual visits compared to those without]. Conclusion: Among patients engaged in RM, the odds of MACE was similar regardless of whether patients had in-person or virtual visits versus no visits. Although there could be unmeasured confounding, these results suggest routine in-person or virtual visits may no longer be necessary for CIED care with RM. Patients, clinicians, and healthcare systems could benefit by reducing low-value visits and re-focusing resources on visits that yield actionable interventions.