View More View Less
  • 1 Szegedi Tudományegyetem, Általános Orvostudományi Kar, Szeged, Semmelweis u. 8., 6725
  • 2 Szegedi Tudományegyetem, Általános Orvostudományi Kar, Szeged
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $25.00

1 year subscription (Individual Only)

USD  $1,070.00

Absztrakt:

A telemedicina egy fiatal tudomány, amely integrálni hivatott az informatika és telekommunikáció innovációit az orvostudományba. A telemedicina által kínált sikeres lehetőségeknek nagy biztonságú, költséghatékony folyamatokkal kell biztosítani az egészségügyi ellátás terheinek csökkenését. Célunk volt, hogy bemutassuk a telemedicinás projektek fejlődési fázisait a telekardiológia létező megoldásain keresztül. Nemzetközi publikációk segítségével megvizsgáltuk a vérnyomás-távfelügyelet, elektrokardiográfiás távdiagnosztika, implantálható cardioverter-defibrillátor távgondozása és zseb-ultrahangkészülékek múltbéli és jelenlegi helyzetét. Az újdonságok hatékony bevezetéséhez a) számos nemzetközileg elfogadott, magabiztosan reprodukálható „jó gyakorlatra” van szükség annak érdekében, hogy b) a nemzetközi orvostársaságok ajánlásai megszülethessenek, c) garantálni kell továbbá a költséghatékony alkalmazást, a jól megtervezett fenntarthatóságot, d) a személyes adatok biztonságát, illetve e) elengedhetetlen a szakemberek, betegek képzésének fejlesztése. A munkánk során tárgyalt sztenderdeket javasoljuk a telemedicinás folyamatok fejlesztői számára, hogy a klinikai gyakorlatba eredményesebben tudjanak belépni új termékeikkel. Biztató, hogy a telekardiológia jelenlegi szereplői között találunk a fenti kritériumoknak részben vagy teljesen megfelelőket is. A további fejlődés hozzájárulhat az egészségügy anyagi fenntarthatóságához és az emberierőforrás-korlátok leküzdéséhez. Orv Hetil. 2017; 158(44): 1741–1746.

  • 1

    Heinzelmann PJ, Lugn NE, Kvedar JC. Telemedicine in the future. J Telemed Telecare 2005; 11: 384–390.

  • 2

    Schwamm LH, Chumbler N, Brown E, et al. Recommendations for the implementation of telehealth in cardiovascular and stroke care: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation 2017; 135: e24–e44.

  • 3

    Danis J, Forczek E, Bari F. Telemedicine in dermatological practice: teledermatology. [A telemedicina alkalmazása a bőrgyógyászatban: a teledermatológia.] Orv Hetil. 2016; 157: 363–369. [Hungarian]

  • 4

    Yanicelli LM, Parodi NF, Goy CB, et al. Heart failure management: comparative study of telemonitoring systems and the medical consensuses. In: Braidot A, Hadad A. (eds.) VI Latin American Congress on Biomedical Engineering CLAIB 2014, Paraná, Argentina 29, 30 & 31 October 2014. IFMBE Proceedings 49. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 821–824.

  • 5

    Clemensen J, Rothmann MJ, Smith AC, et al. Participatory design methods in telemedicine research. J Telemed Telecare 2016 Dec 27. [Epub ahead of print]

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Tomcsányi J, Bezzeg P. Home ECG monitoring of high-risk post-myocardial infarction patients. [Otthoni EKG-monitorozás magas rizikójú posztinfarktusos betegeken.] Orv Hetil. 2009; 150: 985–988. [Hungarian]

  • 7

    Zullig LL, Melnyk SD, Goldstein K, et al. The role of home blood pressure telemonitoring in managing hypertensive populations. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2013; 15: 346–355.

  • 8

    Sivakumaran D, Earle KA. Telemonitoring: use in the management of hypertension. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2014; 10: 217–224.

  • 9

    Verberk WJ, Omboni S, Kollias A, et al. Screening for atrial fibrillation with automated blood pressure measurement: Research evidence and practice recommendations. Int J Cardiol. 2016; 203: 465–473.

  • 10

    Nguyen HH, Van Hare GF, Rudokas M, et al. SPEAR Trial: Smartphone Pediatric ElectrocARdiogram Trial. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0136256.

  • 11

    Papai G, Racz I, Czuriga D, et al. Transtelephonic electrocardiography in the management of patients with acute coronary syndrome. J Electrocardiol. 2014; 47: 294–299.

  • 12

    De Waure C, Cadeddu C, Gualano MR, et al. Telemedicine for the reduction of myocardial infarction mortality: a systematic review and a meta-analysis of published studies. Telemed J E Health 2012; 18: 323–328.

  • 13

    Al-Zaiti SS, Shusterman V, Carey MG. Novel technical solutions for wireless ECG transmission & analysis in the age of the internet cloud. J Electrocardiol. 2013; 46: 540–545.

  • 14

    Oliveira MT Jr, Paula LJ, Marcolino MS, et al. Executive summary – guideline on telecardiology in the care of patients with acute coronary syndrome and other cardiac diseases. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2015; 105: 105–111.

  • 15

    Caldarola P, Gulizia MM, Gabrielli D, et al. ANMCO/SIT Consensus document: telemedicine for cardiovascular emergency networks. Eur Heart J Suppl. 2017; 19(Suppl D): D229–D243.

  • 16

    Caldarola P, Gulizia MM, Gabrielli D, et al. ANMCO/SIT Consensus document: Telemedicine and the emergency/urgency care network. G Ital Cardiol. (Rome) 2016; 17: 508–528.

  • 17

    Cinaglia P, Tradigo G, Guzzi PH, et al. Design and implementation of a telecardiology system for mobile devices. Interdiscip Sci. 2015; 7: 266–274.

  • 18

    Brokmann JC, Conrad C, Rossaint R, et al. Treatment of acute coronary syndrome by telemedically supported paramedics compared with physician-based treatment: a prospective, interventional, multicenter trial. J Med Internet Res. 2016; 18: e314.

  • 19

    Dubner S, Auricchio A, Steinberg JS, et al. ISHNE/EHRA expert consensus on remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Europace 2012; 14: 278–293.

  • 20

    Hauck M, Bauer A, Voss F, et al. “Home monitoring” for early detection of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator failure: a single-center prospective observational study. Clin Res Cardiol. 2009; 98: 19–24.

  • 21

    Varma N, Ricci RP. Telemedicine and cardiac implants: what is the benefit? Eur Heart J. 2013; 34: 1885–1895.

  • 22

    Landolina M, Perego GB, Lunati M, et al. Remote monitoring reduces healthcare use and improves quality of care in heart failure patients with implantable defibrillators: the evolution of management strategies of heart failure patients with implantable defibrillators (EVOLVO) study. Circulation 2012; 125: 2985–2992.

  • 23

    Boriani G, Da Costa A, Ricci RP, et al. The MOnitoring Resynchronization dEvices and CARdiac patiEnts (MORE-CARE) randomized controlled trial: phase 1 results on dynamics of early intervention with remote monitoring. J Med Internet Res. 2013; 15: e167.

  • 24

    Burri H. Remote follow-up and continuous remote monitoring, distinguished. Europace 2013; 15(Suppl 1): i14–i16.

  • 25

    Hindricks G, Elsner C, Piorkowski C, et al. Quarterly vs. yearly clinical follow-up of remotely monitored recipients of prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: results of the REFORM trial. Eur Heart J. 2014; 35: 98–105.

  • 26

    Heidbuchel H, Hindricks G, Broadhurst P, et al. EuroEco (European Health Economic Trial on Home Monitoring in ICD Patients): a provider perspective in five European countries on costs and net financial impact of follow-up with or without remote monitoring. Eur Heart J. 2015; 36: 158–169.

  • 27

    Boriani G. Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electrical devices in Europe: quo vadis? Europace 2015; 17: 674–676.

  • 28

    Boriani G, Nesti M, Ziacchi M, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy: an overview on guidelines. Card Electrophysiol Clin. 2015; 7: 673–693.

  • 29

    De Simone A, Leoni L, Luzi M, et al. Remote monitoring improves outcome after ICD implantation: the clinical efficacy in the management of heart failure (EFFECT) study. Europace 2015; 17: 1267–1275.

  • 30

    Guédon-Moreau L, Lacroix D, Sadoul N, et al. Costs of remote monitoring vs. ambulatory follow-ups of implanted cardioverter defibrillators in the randomized ECOST study. Europace 2014; 16: 1181–1188.

  • 31

    Sicari R, Galderisi M, Voigt JU, et al. The use of pocket-size imaging devices: a position statement of the European Association of Echocardiography. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2011; 12: 85–87.

  • 32

    Gustafsson M, Alehagen U, Johansson P. Imaging congestion with a pocket ultrasound device: prognostic implications in patients with chronic heart failure. J Card Fail. 2015; 21: 548–554.

  • 33

    Khan HA, Wineinger NE, Uddin PQ, et al. Can hospital rounds with pocket ultrasound by cardiologists reduce standard echocardiography? Am J Med. 2014; 127: 669.e1–e7.

  • 34

    De Backer D, Fagnoul D. Pocket ultrasound devices for focused echocardiography. Crit Care 2012; 16: 134.

  • 35

    Biais M, Carrié C, Delaunay F, et al. Evaluation of a new pocket echoscopic device for focused cardiac ultrasonography in an emergency setting. Crit Care 2012; 16: R82.

  • 36

    Mirabel M, Celermajer D, Beraud AS, et al. Pocket-sized focused cardiac ultrasound: strengths and limitations. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2015; 108: 197–205.

  • 37

    Kimura BJ, Gilcrease GW 3rd, Showalter BK, et al. Diagnostic performance of a pocket-sized ultrasound device for quick-look cardiac imaging. Am J Emerg Med. 2012; 30: 32–36.

  • 38

    Vignon P, Mücke F, Bellec F, et al. Basic critical care echocardiography: validation of a curriculum dedicated to noncardiologist residents. Crit Care Med. 2011; 39: 636–642.

  • 39

    Mai TV, Ahn DT, Phillips CT, et al. Feasibility of remote real-time guidance of a cardiac examination performed by novices using a pocket-sized ultrasound device. Emerg Med Int. 2013; 2013: 627230.

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Oct 2020 27 0 0
Nov 2020 22 0 0
Dec 2020 14 0 0
Jan 2021 18 0 0
Feb 2021 14 0 0
Mar 2021 20 0 0
Apr 2021 5 1 2