Heart rhythm abnormalities underlie one of the common presenting complaints to the A\&E and out-patient departments, specifically awareness of heart beats or palpitations. Unless an ECG (electrocardiogram) tracing of the heart rhythm can be recorded while the patient is having symptoms, it is very difficult to determine the cause of the palpitations. The conventional approach is to refer these patients from the emergency departments to the Cardiology outpatients where they undergo repeated short term rhythm monitoring hoping to record the rhythm underlying the patient's complaint. Unfortunately, this often yields no results thus delaying definitive treatment and incurring extra costs of repeated investigations and A\&E presentations. This study aims to compare the ability of the conventional approach to establish a definite diagnosis compared to that of an early invasive monitoring approach with a small implantable device that records the heart rhythm at all time for up to 18 months.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
56
Barts and the London NHS Trust
London, United Kingdom
The primary endpoint of the study is the proportion of patients achieving a definite diagnosis in each of the two groups at the end of one year
Time frame: 1 year
The time taken from randomisation in the A&E to making the diagnosis (if any) in each group
Time frame: 1 Year
The cost of achieving a diagnosis in each group
Time frame: 1 Year
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.