Study Stopped
it is unethical to continue a study with deactivation of HM in the control arm although a reduced risk of all-cause death has been shown in previous trials
European Health Economic Trial on Home Monitoring in ICD and CRT-D Patients (EuroEco)
EuroEco
1 other identifier
interventional
409
6 countries
17
Brief Summary
BIOTRONIK Home Monitoring (HM) service enables the doctors to safely follow up (FU) their ICD and CRT-D patients in a remote fashion, with fewer in-clinic consultations. This may result in a more efficient FU and cost-savings for the health care payer. The EuroEco study:
- 1.Outlines a new HM-based FU model for the ICD and CRT-D patients that combines in-clinic consultations and regular check ups of the patient/ICD/CRT-D data received through the HM service.
- 2.Compares the direct costs for physicians and clinics for the HM-based FU of ICD and CRT-D patients versus the traditional FU.
- 3.Compares the indicators of patients' safety between the two FU models.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Oct 2008
Longer than P75 for not_applicable
17 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
October 17, 2008
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
October 17, 2008
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
October 20, 2008
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
July 21, 2016
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
October 27, 2016
CompletedJuly 2, 2017
June 1, 2017
7.8 years
October 17, 2008
June 29, 2017
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Euro spent to follow up ICD and CRT-D patients
26 months
Secondary Outcomes (7)
Average number of in-hospital follow-up visits per patient
26 months
Time to first in-hospital follow-up visit beyond the first post-implantation visit
12 months
Effective financial impact on hospitals / physicians
26 months
Proportion of in-hospital consultations with relevant findings (i.e. necessitating changes in medical therapy, device programming or re-hospitalisations/ interventions)
26 months
Proportion of patients with HM-triggered interventions that, without remote monitoring, would have first been discovered at a subsequent scheduled follow-up
26 months
- +2 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
1 = Home Monitoring
EXPERIMENTALRemote monitoring of ICD and CRT-D function and patient status
2 = No Home Monitoring
ACTIVE COMPARATORHome Monitoring option is switched off
Interventions
Remote monitoring of ICD and CRT-D function and patient status may result in more effective follow-up and increased patient safety
Home Monitoring option is switched off (in the same kind of devices as used in the other study arm).
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Indication for 1-/2- chamber ICD implantation, including replacement indication
- Patient is willing and able to comply with the clinical investigation plan and has provided written informed consent
You may not qualify if:
- Patients with contraindication to ICD implantation
- Patients with indication for cardiac resynchronization (CRT)
- Minors and pregnant women
- Patients participating in another study
- Patients with indication for de novo CRT-D implantation according to current guidelines
- Patient is willing and able to comply with the clinical investigation plan and has provided written informed consent
- Patients who had a cardiac device implanted before (upgrade, device replacement)
- Life expectancy less than 12 months
- Planned heart transplantation
- NYHA IV
- Minors \< 18 years
- Pregnant and breast-feeding women
- Participation in another clinical study
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (17)
Heart Rhythm Management Institute, Free University of Brussels
Brussels, Belgium
Ziekenhuis Oost Limburg, Campus St. Jan
Genk, Belgium
Jessa Ziekenhuis (Campus Virga Jesse)
Hasselt, Belgium
ZU Gasthuisberg
Leuven, Belgium
University of Oulu
Oulu, 90014, Finland
Helios Klinikum Aue
Aue, 08280, Germany
Charité Berlin Campus Mitte
Berlin, 10117, Germany
Städt. Klinikum St. Georg gGmbH
Leipzig, 04129, Germany
Herzzentrum Leipzig, Abteilung Rhythmologie
Leipzig, Germany
Leiden Universitair Medisch Centrum
Leiden, 2333, Netherlands
Hospital Universitario La Paz
La Paz, Spain
Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda
Madrid, Spain
Hospital Ntra.Sra.de la Candelaria
Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain
Arrythmia Unit, Complejo Hospitalario de Vigo (Hospital Xeral)
Vigo, Spain
Cardiology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary
Aberdeen, United Kingdom
Cardiology, St. Peters Hospital/St. George's
Chertsey, United Kingdom
Cardiology; Raigmore Hospital
Inverness, United Kingdom
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- STUDY CHAIR
Hein Heidbüchel, Prof. Dr.
ZU Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Masking Details
- HM ON vs. HM OFF
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- INDUSTRY
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
October 17, 2008
First Posted
October 20, 2008
Study Start
October 17, 2008
Primary Completion
July 21, 2016
Study Completion
October 27, 2016
Last Updated
July 2, 2017
Record last verified: 2017-06
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share