Search

Background: Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) may enable early identification of COVID-19 to facilitate timelier intervention. Objective: To characterize early physiologic changes associated with the onset of acute COVID-19 infection, as well as during and after acute infection, among patients with CIEDs. Methods: CIED sensor data from March 2020 to February 2021 from 286 patients with a CIED were linked to clinical data from electronic health records. Three cohorts were created: known COVID-positive (n = 20), known COVID-negative (n = 166), and a COVID-untested control group (n = 100) included to account for testing bias. Associations between changes in CIED sensors from baseline (including HeartLogic index, a composite index predicting worsening heart failure) and COVID-19 status were evaluated using logistic regression models, Wilcoxon signed rank tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Significant differences existed between the cohorts by race, ethnicity, CIED device type, and medical admissions. Several sensors changed earlier for COVID-positive vs COVID-negative patients: HeartLogic index (mean 16.4 vs 9.2 days [P = .08]), respiratory rate (mean 8.5 vs 3.9 days [P = .01], and activity (mean 8.2 vs 3.5 days [P = .008]). Respiratory rate during the 7 days before testing significantly predicted a positive vs negative COVID-19 test, adjusting for age, sex, race, and device type (odds ratio 2.31 [95% confidence interval 1.33–5.13]). Conclusion: Physiologic data from CIEDs could signal early signs of infection that precede clinical symptoms, which may be used to support early detection of infection to prevent decompensation in this at-risk population.

Background: Free mobile applications (apps) that use photoplethysmography (PPG) waveforms may extend atrial fibrillation (AF) detection to underserved populations, but they have not been rigorously evaluated. Objective: The purpose of this study was to systematically review and evaluate the quality, functionality, and adherence to self-management behaviors of existing mobile apps for AF. Methods: We systematically searched 3 app stores for apps that were free, available in English, and intended for use by patients to detect and manage AF. A minimum of 2 reviewers evaluated (1) app quality, using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS); (2) functionality using published criteria; and (3) features that support 4 self-management behaviors (including PPG waveform monitoring) identified using evidence-based guidelines. Interrater reliability between the reviewers was calculated. Results: Of 12 included apps, 5 (42%) scored above average for quality (MARS score ≥3.0). App quality was highest for their ease of use, navigation, layout, and visual appeal (eg, functionality and aesthetics) and lowest for their behavioral change support and subjective impressions of quality. The most common app functionalities were capturing and graphically displaying user-entered data (n = 9 [75%]). Nearly all apps (n = 11 [92%]) supported PPG waveform monitoring, but only 2 (17%) supported all 4 self-management behaviors. Interrater reliability was high (0.75–0.83). Conclusion: The reviewed apps had wide variability in quality, functionality, and adherence to self-management behaviors. Given the accessibility of these apps to underserved populations and the tremendous potential they hold for improving AF detection and management, high priority should be given to improving app quality and functionality.