Search

Background: Heart rate is routinely measured as part of the clinical examination but is rarely acted upon unless it is well outside a population-based normal range. With wearable sensor technologies, heart rate can now be continuously measured, making it possible to accurately identify an individual's "normal" heart rate and potentially important variations in it over time. Our objective is to describe inter- and intra-individual variability in resting heart rate (RHR) collected over the course of two years using a wearable device, studying the variations of resting heart rate as a function of time of year, as well as individuals characteristics like age, sex, average sleep duration, and body mass index (BMI). Methods and findings: Our retrospective, longitudinal cohort study includes 92,457 de-identified individuals from the United States (all 50 states), who consistently—over at least 35 weeks in the period from March 2016 to February 2018, for at least 2 days per week, and at least 20 hours per day—wore a heart rate wrist-worn tracker. In this study, we report daily RHR and its association with age, BMI, sex, and sleep duration, and its variation over time. Individual daily RHR was available for a median of 320 days, providing nearly 33 million daily RHR values. We also explored the range in daily RHR variability between individuals, and the long- and short-term changes in the trajectory of an individual's daily RHR. Mean daily RHR was 65 beats per minute (bpm), with a range of 40 to 109 bpm among all individuals. The mean RHR differed significantly by age, sex, BMI, and average sleep duration. Time of year variations were also noted, with a minimum in July and maximum in January. For most subjects, RHR remained relatively stable over the short term, but 20% experienced at least 1 week in which their RHR fluctuated by 10 bpm or more. Conclusions: Individuals have a daily RHR that is normal for them but can differ from another individual's normal by as much as 70 bpm. Within individuals, RHR was much more consistent over time, with a small but significant seasonal trend, and detectable discrete and infrequent episodes outside their norms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the study on the prognostic significance of patients with Thrombocytopenia treated with heparin therapy. According to the author, association of heparin use with the thrombocytopenia is underrecognized and undertreated. The study was conducted in 2420 patients in 48 hospitals in the United States, of which 48 percent are women. The author concludes that the thrombocytopenia frequently occurs with patients who are treated with prolonged heparin therapy, and that it is associated with a worse but short-term clinical outcome.

The article analyzes the potential impact of mobile health (mHealth) technologies on medical care in the U.S. The authors attribute the level of exuberance for mHealth to the unsustainability of health care spending, the rapid growth in wireless connectivity and the need for more precise and individualized medicine. They also identify several obstacles to the acceptance and widespread use of the technologies, including the complexities of the health care system.

The article focuses on acute coronary syndrome, a diagnosis covering unstable angina or a myocardial infarction. A study in the April 5, 2006 issue of the "Journal of the American Medical Association" by Adnan Kastrati and colleagues on whether the drug abciximab is beneficial to patients with ACS after being given 600 mg of clopidogrel as pretreatment is described. A brief history of the treatment of the condition is discussed, as well as the implications of the undefinitive study. Though abciximab seems to be an effective antithrombotic, it shouldn't be used for patients with abnormal troponin levels.

Background: Early identification of an acute respiratory infection is important for reducing transmission and enabling earlier therapeutic intervention. We aimed to prospectively evaluate the feasibility of home-based diagnostic self-testing of viral pathogens in individuals prompted to do so on the basis of self-reported symptoms or individual changes in physiological parameters detected via a wearable sensor., Methods: DETECT-AHEAD was a prospective, decentralised, randomised controlled trial carried out in a subpopulation of an existing cohort (DETECT) of individuals enrolled in a digital-only observational study in the USA. Participants aged 18 years or older were randomly assigned (1:1:1) with a block randomisation scheme stratified by under-represented in biomedical research status. All participants were offered a wearable sensor (Fitbit Sense smartwatch). Participants in groups 1 and 2 received an at-home self-test kit (Alveo be.well) for two acute respiratory viral pathogens: SARS-CoV-2 and respiratory syncytial virus. Participants in group 1 could be alerted through the DETECT study app to take the at-home test on the basis of changes in their physiological data (as detected by our algorithm) or due to self-reported symptoms; those in group 2 were prompted via the app to self-test only due to symptoms. Group 3 served as the control group, without alerts or home testing capability. The primary endpoints, assessed on an intention-to-treat basis, were the number of acute respiratory infections presented (self-reported) and diagnosed (electronic health record), and the number of participants using at-home testing in groups 1 and 2. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04336020., Findings: Between Sept 28 and Dec 30, 2021, 450 participants were recruited and randomly assigned to group 1 (n=149), group 2 (n=151), or group 3 (n=150). 179 (40%) participants were male, 264 (59%) were female, and seven (2%) identified as other. 232 (52%) were from populations historically under-represented in biomedical research. 118 (39%) of the 300 participants in groups 1 and 2 were prompted to self-test, with 61 (52%) successfully completing self-testing. Participants were prompted to home-test more frequently due to symptoms (41 [28%] in group 1 and 51 [34%] in group 2) than due to detected physiological changes (26 [17%] in group 1). Significantly more participants in group 1 received alerts to test than did those in group 2 (67 [45%] vs 51 [34%]; p=0·047). Of the 61 individuals who were prompted to test and successfully did so, 19 (31%) tested positive for a viral pathogen-all for SARS-CoV-2. The individuals diagnosed as positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the electronic health record were eight (5%) in group 1, four (3%) in group 2, and two (1%) in group 3, but it was difficult to confirm if they were tied to symptomatic episodes documented in the trial. There were no adverse events., Interpretation: In this direct-to-participant trial, we showed early feasibility of a decentralised programme to prompt individuals to use a viral pathogen diagnostic test based on symptoms tracked in the study app or physiological changes detected using a wearable sensor. Barriers to adequate participation and performance were also identified, which would need to be addressed before large-scale implementation., Funding: Janssen Pharmaceuticals., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JVi, KH, JVe, MA, LK, JWC, and DT are employed by Janssen Pharmaceuticals. JMR was supported by The Rockefeller Foundation and is now employed by Moderna. ER is employed by CareEvolution. KB-M is a consultant for CareEvolution and was on the Heartline Study Executive Committee. SRS is a consultant for PhysIQ and declares payment for being on the Heartline Study Executive Committee. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Traditional viral illness surveillance relies on in-person clinical or laboratory data, paper-based data collection, and outdated technology for data transfer and aggregation. We aimed to assess whether continuous sensor data can provide an early warning signal for COVID-19 activity as individual physiological and behavioural changes might precede symptom onset, care seeking, and diagnostic testing., Methods: This multivariable, population-based, modelling study recruited adult (aged ≥18 years) participants living in the USA who had a smartwatch or fitness tracker on any device that connected to Apple HealthKit or Google Fit and had joined the DETECT study by downloading the MyDataHelps app. In the model development cohort, we included people who had participated in DETECT between April 1, 2020, and Jan 14, 2022. In the validation cohort, we included individuals who had participated between Jan 15 and Feb 15, 2022. When a participant joins DETECT, they fill out an intake survey of demographic information, including their ZIP code (postal code), and surveys on symptoms, symptom onset, and viral illness test dates and results, if they become unwell. When a participant connects their device, historical sensor data are collected, if available. Sensor data continue to be collected unless a participant withdraws from the study. Using sensor data, we collected each participant's daily resting heart rate and step count during the entire study period and identified anomalous sensor days, in which resting heart rate was higher than, and step count was lower than, a specified threshold calculated for each individual by use of their baseline data. The proportion of users with anomalous data each day was used to create a 7-day moving average. For the main cohort, a negative binomial model predicting 7-day moving averages for COVID-19 case counts, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in real time, 6 days in the future, and 12 days in the future in the USA and California was fitted with CDC-reported data from 3 days before alone (H 0 ) or in combination with anomalous sensor data (H 1 ). We compared the predictions with Pearson correlation. We then validated the model in the validation cohort., Findings: Between April 1, 2020, and Jan 14, 2022, 35 842 participants enrolled in DETECT, of whom 4006 in California and 28 527 in the USA were included in our main cohort. The H 1 model significantly outperformed the H 0 model in predicting the 7-day moving average COVID-19 case counts in California and the USA. For example, Pearson correlation coefficients for predictions 12 days in the future increased by 32·9% in California (from 0·70 [95% CI 0·65-0·73] to 0·93 [0·92-0·94]) and by 12·2% (from 0·82 [0·79-0·84] to 0·92 [0·91-0·93]) in the USA from the H 0 model to the H 1 model. Our validation model also showed significant correlations for predictions in real time, 6 days in the future, and 12 days in the future., Interpretation: Our study showed that passively collected sensor data from consenting participants can provide real-time disease tracking and forecasting. With a growing population of wearable technology users, these sensor data could be integrated into viral surveillance programmes., Funding: The National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the US National Institutes of Health, The Rockefeller Foundation, and Amazon Web Services., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests LMW works for The Rockefeller Foundation, which funded part of this study. VK is the principal and an employee of CareEvolution. ER is the principal science officer and an employee of CareEvolution and Scripps Research. JAP is an adviser for Angiotensin Therapeutics, Precision Health, Cardiosense, and Sense AI. GQ and JMR are supported in part under a grant from The Rockefeller Foundation and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, the US National Institutes of Health. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Traditional screening for COVID-19 typically includes survey questions about symptoms and travel history, as well as temperature measurements. Here, we explore whether personal sensor data collected over time may help identify subtle changes indicating an infection, such as in patients with COVID-19. We have developed a smartphone app that collects smartwatch and activity tracker data, as well as self-reported symptoms and diagnostic testing results, from individuals in the United States, and have assessed whether symptom and sensor data can differentiate COVID-19 positive versus negative cases in symptomatic individuals. We enrolled 30,529 participants between 25 March and 7 June 2020, of whom 3,811 reported symptoms. Of these symptomatic individuals, 54 reported testing positive and 279 negative for COVID-19. We found that a combination of symptom and sensor data resulted in an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80 (interquartile range (IQR): 0.73-0.86) for discriminating between symptomatic individuals who were positive or negative for COVID-19, a performance that is significantly better (P < 0.01) than a model 1 that considers symptoms alone (AUC = 0.71; IQR: 0.63-0.79). Such continuous, passively captured data may be complementary to virus testing, which is generally a one-off or infrequent sampling assay.

Background: Acute infections can cause an individual to have an elevated resting heart rate (RHR) and change their routine daily activities due to the physiological response to the inflammatory insult. Consequently, we aimed to evaluate if population trends of seasonal respiratory infections, such as influenza, could be identified through wearable sensors that collect RHR and sleep data., Methods: We obtained de-identified sensor data from 200 000 individuals who used a Fitbit wearable device from March 1, 2016, to March 1, 2018, in the USA. We included users who wore a Fitbit for at least 60 days and used the same wearable throughout the entire period, and focused on the top five states with the most Fitbit users in the dataset: California, Texas, New York, Illinois, and Pennsylvania. Inclusion criteria included having a self-reported birth year between 1930 and 2004, height greater than 1 m, and weight greater than 20 kg. We excluded daily measurements with missing RHR, missing wear time, and wear time less than 1000 min per day. We compared sensor data with weekly estimates of influenza-like illness (ILI) rates at the state level, as reported by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), by identifying weeks in which Fitbit users displayed elevated RHRs and increased sleep levels. For each state, we modelled ILI case counts with a negative binomial model that included 3-week lagged CDC ILI rate data (null model) and the proportion of weekly Fitbit users with elevated RHR and increased sleep duration above a specified threshold (full model). We also evaluated weekly change in ILI rate by linear regression using change in proportion of elevated Fitbit data. Pearson correlation was used to compare predicted versus CDC reported ILI rates., Findings: We identified 47 249 users in the top five states who wore a Fitbit consistently during the study period, including more than 13·3 million total RHR and sleep measures. We found the Fitbit data significantly improved ILI predictions in all five states, with an average increase in Pearson correlation of 0·12 (SD 0·07) over baseline models, corresponding to an improvement of 6·3-32·9%. Correlations of the final models with the CDC ILI rates ranged from 0·84 to 0·97. Week-to-week changes in the proportion of Fitbit users with abnormal data were associated with week-to-week changes in ILI rates in most cases., Interpretation: Activity and physiological trackers are increasingly used in the USA and globally to monitor individual health. By accessing these data, it could be possible to improve real-time and geographically refined influenza surveillance. This information could be vital to enact timely outbreak response measures to prevent further transmission of influenza cases during outbreaks., Funding: Partly supported by the US National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Many barriers to primary healthcare accessibility in the United States exist including an increased opportunity cost associated with seeking primary care. New models of healthcare delivery aimed at addressing these problems are emerging. The potential impact that on-demand primary care physician house calls services can have on healthcare accessibility, patient care, and satisfaction by both patients and physicians is poorly characterized.We performed a retrospective observational analysis on data from 13,849 patients who utilized Heal, Inc, an application (app)-based, on-demand house calls platform between August 2016 and July 2017. We assessed house call wait time and visit duration, diagnoses by International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision, Inc (ICD10) codes, and house call outcomes by post-visit prescription and lab requests, and patient satisfaction survey.Patients who utilized this physician house call service had a bimodal age distribution peaking at age 1 year and 36 years. Same day acute sick exams (93.9% of pediatric (Ped) and 66.9% of adult requests) for fever and/or acute upper respiratory infection represented the most common use. The mean wait time for as soon as possible house calls were 96.1 minutes, with an overall mean house call duration of 27.1 minutes. A house call was primarily chosen over an Urgent Care Clinic or Doctor's office (46.2% and 41.6% of respondents, respectively), due to convenience or fastest appointment available (69.6% and 33.8% of respondents, respectively). Most survey respondents (94.2%) would schedule house calls again.On-demand physician house calls programs can expand access options to primary healthcare, primarily used by younger individuals with acute illness and preference for a smartphone app-based home visit.

This publication describes uniform definitions for cardiovascular and stroke outcomes developed by the Standardized Data Collection for Cardiovascular Trials Initiative and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA established the Standardized Data Collection for Cardiovascular Trials Initiative in 2009 to simplify the design and conduct of clinical trials intended to support marketing applications. The writing committee recognizes that these definitions may be used in other types of clinical trials and clinical care processes where appropriate. Use of these definitions at the FDA has enhanced the ability to aggregate data within and across medical product development programs, conduct meta-analyses to evaluate cardiovascular safety, integrate data from multiple trials, and compare effectiveness of drugs and devices. Further study is needed to determine whether prospective data collection using these common definitions improves the design, conduct, and interpretability of the results of clinical trials., (© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Efficient methods for screening populations for undiagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) are needed to reduce its associated mortality, morbidity, and costs. The use of digital technologies, including wearable sensors and large health record data sets allowing for targeted outreach toward individuals at increased risk for AF, might allow for unprecedented opportunities for effective, economical screening. The trial's primary objective is to determine, in a real-world setting, whether using wearable sensors in a risk-targeted screening population can diagnose asymptomatic AF more effectively than routine care. Additional key objectives include (1) exploring 2 rhythm-monitoring strategies-electrocardiogram-based and exploratory pulse wave-based-for detection of new AF, and (2) comparing long-term clinical and resource outcomes among groups. In all, 2,100 Aetna members will be randomized 1:1 to either immediate or delayed monitoring, in which a wearable patch will capture a single-lead electrocardiogram during the first and last 2 weeks of a 4-month period beginning immediately or 4 months after enrollment, respectively. An observational, risk factor-matched control group (n = 4,000) will be developed from members who did not receive an invitation to participate. The primary end point is the incidence of new AF in the immediate- vs delayed-monitoring arms at the end of the 4-month monitoring period. Additional efficacy and safety end points will be captured at 1 and 3 years. The results of this digital medicine trial might benefit a substantial proportion of the population by helping identify and refine screening methods for undiagnosed AF., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Emerging biomarkers for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) may enhance conventional risk-prediction algorithms if they are informative and associated with risk independently of established predictors. In this study, we constructed a cohort for testing emerging biomarkers for AMI in managed-care populations using existing biospecimen repositories linked to electronic health records (EHR)., Hypothesis: Electronic health record-based biorepositories collected by healthcare systems can be federated to provide large, methodologically sound testing sets for biomarker validation., Methods: Subjects ages 40 to 80 years were selected from 2 existing population-based biospecimen repositories. Incident AMI status and covariates were ascertained from the EHR. An ad hoc model for AMI risk was parameterized and validated. Simulation was used to test incremental gains in performance due to the inclusion of biomarkers in this model. Gains in performance were assessed in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) and case reclassification., Results: A total of 18 329 individuals (57% female) contributed 108 400 person-years of EHR follow-up. The crude AMI incidence was 10.8 and 5.0 per 1000 person-years among males and females, respectively. Compared with the model with risk factors alone, inclusion of a simulated biomarker yielded substantial gains in sensitivity without loss of specificity. Furthermore, a net ROC-AUC gain of 13.3% was observed, as well as correct reclassification of 9.8% of incident cases (79 of 806) that were otherwise not considered statin-indicated at baseline under the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III criteria., Conclusions: More research is needed to assess incremental contribution of emerging biomarkers for AMI prediction in managed-care populations., (© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: Our purpose was to evaluate long-term mortality and identify factors associated with 1-year mortality in patients who underwent elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Background: While long-term outcomes in PCI patients have been reported previously, limited data are currently available regarding the comparative long-term outcomes in PCI patients who receive enoxaparin versus intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH)., Methods: We conducted a follow-up analysis of clinical outcomes at 1 year in patients enrolled in the STEEPLE (SafeTy and Efficacy of Enoxaparin in Percutaneous coronary intervention patients, an internationaL randomized Evaluation) trial of 3,528 patients undergoing elective PCI. Patients were randomized to receive either intravenous 0.50-mg/kg or 0.75-mg/kg enoxaparin or intravenous UFH during elective PCI procedures. All-cause mortality at 1 year after index PCI was the main outcome measure., Results: Mortality rates were 1.4%, 2.0%, and 1.5% from 1 month to 1 year, and 2.3%, 2.2%, and 1.9% from randomization to 1 year, after index PCI in patients receiving 0.50 mg/kg enoxaparin, 0.75 mg/kg enoxaparin, and UFH, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified nonfatal myocardial infarction and/or urgent target vessel revascularization up to 30 days after index PCI (hazard ratio: 3.5, 95% confidence interval: 1.7 to 7.3; p < 0.001), and major bleeding within 48 h (hazard ratio: 3.0, 95% confidence interval: 1.1 to 8.5; p = 0.04) as the strongest independent risk factors for 1-year mortality., Conclusions: The 1-year mortality rates were low and comparable between patients receiving enoxaparin and UFH during elective PCI. Periprocedural ischemic or bleeding events were the strongest independent predictors of 1-year mortality. (The STEEPLE Trial; NCT00077844).

Over the past two decades, we have witnessed a large decrease in the death and complication rate of patients experiencing acute myocardial infarction (MI), due to our ability to restore blood flow to infarct-related arteries. Therapies include strategies to inhibit platelet function and induce fibrinolysis, and mechanical reperfusion with percutaneous intervention. Despite decreases in morbidity and mortality with thrombolytic therapy, reperfusion rates remain less than optimal. With standard fibrinolytic therapy in combination with aspirin, it is thought that thrombolytic-induced platelet activation may be an important reason for failure to induce perfusion, or maintain reperfusion in the infarct-related artery. In the past 10 years we have moved from platelet inhibition with aspirin to newer, more potent platelet inhibitors such as glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa antagonists. Recent trials have evaluated the efficacy and safety of combining thrombolytic drugs with GP IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists. Future trends may use combination therapy as a part of a mechanical strategy, using these medications to induce early reperfusion as the patient is prepared for percutaneous intervention. This review summarizes recently published trials using combination thrombolytic and GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitor therapy in the treatment of acute MI.