Benefits of monitoring patients with mobile cardiac telemetry (MCT) compared with the Event or Holter monitors

Figures & data

Table 1 Demographic information of patients using MCT, Event, and Holter monitors

Sex: age	Midwest	Northeast	South	West	Total
Females: <40 years	0.7%	0.4%	1.1%	0.4%	2.5%
Males: <40 years	2.2%	1.1%	4.4%	1.2%	8.9%
Females: <40 years 40–65 years	4.6%	2.1%	7.3%	2.2%	16.1%
Males: 40–65 years	5.9%	2.4%	10.7%	3.0%	22.0%
Females: >65 years	10.9%	2.9%	7.3%	3.8%	24.9%
Males: >65 years	11.0%	2.9%	7.7%	3.9%	25.6%
Total	35.3%	11.8%	38.4%	14.5%	100%

Abbreviation: MCT, mobile cardiac telemetry.

Table 2 Patients diagnosed with arrhythmia when using MCT, Event, and Holter monitors

	n	Diagnosed	Difference	P-value
MCT	5,129	61.3%
Event	24,023	23.0%	36%	0.0006
Holter	57,143	24.2%	35%	0.0006

Abbreviation: MCT, mobile cardiac telemetry.

Table 3 Patients treated with antiarrhythmic drugs when using MCT, Event, and Holter monitors

	n	Treated	Difference	P-value
MCT	5,005	61.1%
Event	22,078	39.0%	20%	0.0033
Holter	52,097	43.0%	16%	0.0018

Abbreviation: MCT, mobile cardiac telemetry.

Table 4 Savings when using MCT: ablation, CABG, heart/pericardium, and valve/septa procedures

	MCT vs Event			MCT vs Holter
	Savings (US$)	n	P-value	Savings (US$)	n	P-value
Ablation	35,114	54	<0.0001	36,115	45	<0.0001
CABG				41,700	32	0.0003
Heart/pericardium	17,131	43	0.0281	8,606	54	0.0003
Valve/septa	58,362	35	0.0422	55,390	46	0.0003

Abbreviations: MCT, mobile cardiac telemetry; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; vs, versus.

Table 5 Savings (US$) when using MCT – ablation

	Device	Pre-	Post-	Difference	P-value
MCT vs Event (n=54)
Test	MCT	16,132	10,376	(5,756)
Control	Event	6,043	35,400	29,358
Impact				(35,114)	<0.0001
MCT vs Holter (n=45)
Test	MCT	17,996	8,485	(9,511)
Control	Holter	2,759	29,362	26,604
Impact				(36,115)	<0.0001

Abbreviations: MCT, mobile cardiac telemetry; vs, versus.

Table 6 Savings (US$) when using MCT – CABG

	MCT vs Holter (n=32)
	Device	Pre-	Post-	Difference	P-value
Test	MCT	28,508	17,820	(10,688)
Control	Holter	8,960	39,972	31,012
Impact				(41,700)	0.0003

Abbreviations: MCT, mobile cardiac telemetry; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; vs, versus.

Table 7 Savings (US$) when using MCT – heart/pericardium procedures

	Device	Pre-	Post-	Difference	P-value
MCT vs Event (n=43)
Test	MCT	11,227	15,470	4,243
Control	Event	2,961	24,334	21,374
Impact				(17,131)	0.0281
MCT vs Holter (n=54)
Test	MCT	6,010	8,065	2,055
Control	Holter	1,016	11,677	10,661
Impact				(8,606)	0.0003

Abbreviations: MCT, mobile cardiac telemetry; vs, versus.

Table 8 Savings (US$) when using MCT – valve/septa procedures

	Device	Pre-	Post-	Difference	P-value
MCT vs Event (n=35)
Test	MCT	55,624	86,291	30,667
Control	Event	23,345	112,374	89,029
Impact				(58,362)	0.0422
MCT vs Holter (n=46)
Test	MCT	30,429	42,436	12,007
Control	Holter	10,912	78,308	67,397
Impact				(55,390)	0.0003

Abbreviations: MCT, mobile cardiac telemetry; vs, versus.