Gelişmiş Arama

Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorManninger, Martin
dc.contributor.authorZweiker, David
dc.contributor.authorHovakimyan, Tatevik
dc.contributor.authorMatusik, Pawel T
dc.contributor.authorGül, Enes Elvin
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-14T13:01:38Z
dc.date.available2025-10-14T13:01:38Z
dc.date.issued2024en_US
dc.identifier.citationManninger, M., Zweiker, D., Hovakimyan, T., Matusik, P. T., Conti, S., Ollitrault, P., … Linz, D. (2024). Physician preferences in using novel digital devices for the management of atrial fibrillation—A das‐cam iii survey. Clinical Cardiology, 47(12), e24331. https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.24331en_US
dc.identifier.issn0160-9289
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12900/829
dc.description.abstractAim: A recent European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) practical guide provides guidance on the use of novel digital devices for heart rhythm analysis using either electrocardiogram (ECG) or photoplethysmography (PPG) technology for the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (AF). This survey assesses physicians' preferences to use digital devices in patients with possible AF and their impact on clinical decision-making. Methods and Results: Participants of the DAS-CAM III initiated and distributed an online survey assessing physician preferences in using digital devices for the management of AF in different clinical scenarios. A total of 505 physicians (median age: 38 [IQR 33-46] years) from 30 countries completed the survey. A third of respondents were electrophysiologists, the others were cardiologists, cardiology residents, or general practitioners. Electrophysiologists were more likely to have experience with both ECG-based (92% vs. 68%, p < 0.001) and PPG-based (60% vs. 34%, p < 0.001) digital devices. The initial diagnostic approach to each scenario (symptomatic low-risk, symptomatic high-risk, or asymptomatic high-risk patient) was heterogeneous. Electrophysiologists preferred intermittent single-lead ECG monitoring to traditional Holter ECGs to screen for AF. Both electrophysiologists and non-electrophysiologists would rarely use PPG-based devices to diagnose and screen for AF (8.2%-9.8%). Electrophysiologists and non-electrophysiologists use ECG-based technology to confirm PPG-documented tracings suggestive of AF. Conclusion: While PPG-based digital devices are rarely used for diagnosis and screening for AF, intermittent ECG-based digital devices are beginning to be implemented in clinical practice. More education on the potential of novel digital devices is required to achieve diagnostic pathways as suggested by the EHRA practical guide.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWILEYen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1002/clc.24331en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectAtrial fibrillationen_US
dc.subjectDigital devicesen_US
dc.subjectPhotoplethysmographyen_US
dc.titlePhysician Preferences in Using Novel Digital Devices for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation-A DAS-CAM III Surveyen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.departmentİstanbul Atlas Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Dahili Tıp Bilimleri Bölümüen_US
dc.contributor.institutionauthorGül, Enes Elvin
dc.identifier.volume47en_US
dc.identifier.issue12en_US
dc.relation.journalCLINICAL CARDIOLOGYen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster