A Nordic Perspective on Patient Online Record Access and the European Health Data Space.

The Nordic countries are, together with the United States, forerunners in online record access (ORA), which has now become widespread. The importance of accessible and structured health data has also been highlighted by policy makers internationally. To ensure the full realization of ORA's potential in the short and long term, there is a pressing need to study ORA from a cross-disciplinary, clinical, humanistic, and social sciences perspective that looks beyond strictly technical aspects. In this viewpoint paper, we explore the policy changes in the European Health Data Space (EHDS) proposal to advance ORA across the European Union, informed by our research in a Nordic-led project that carries out the first of its kind, large-scale international investigation of patients' ORA-NORDeHEALTH (Nordic eHealth for Patients: Benchmarking and Developing for the Future). We argue that the EHDS proposal will pave the way for patients to access and control third-party access to their electronic health records. In our analysis of the proposal, we have identified five key principles for ORA: (1) the right to access, (2) proxy access, (3) patient input of their own data, (4) error and omission rectification, and (5) access control. ORA implementation today is fragmented throughout Europe, and the EHDS proposal aims to ensure all European citizens have equal online access to their health data. However, we argue that in order to implement the EHDS, we need more research evidence on the key ORA principles we have identified in our analysis. Results from the NORDeHEALTH project provide some of that evidence, but we have also identified important knowledge gaps that still need further exploration.

Adolescents' reasons for accessing their health records online, perceived usefulness and experienced provider encouragement: a national survey in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Having online access to electronic health records (EHRs) may help patients become engaged in their care at an early age. However, little is known about adolescents using patient portals. A national survey conducted within the Nordic eHealth project NORDeHEALTH provided an important opportunity to advance our understanding of adolescent users of patient portals. The present study explored reasons for reading the EHRs, the perceived usefulness of information and functions in a patient portal and the association between frequency of use and encouragement to read the EHR. METHODS: Data were collected in a survey using convenience sampling, available through the Swedish online health portal during 3 weeks in January and February 2022. This study included a subset of items and only respondents aged 15-19. Demographic factors and frequencies on Likert-style questions were reported with descriptive statistics, while Fisher's exact test was used to explore differences in use frequency based on having been encouraged to read by a healthcare professional (HCP). RESULTS: Of 13 008 users who completed the survey, 218 (1.7%) were unique users aged 15-19 (females: 77.1%). One-fifth (47/218, 21.6%) had been encouraged by HCPs to read their records, and having been encouraged by HCPs was related to higher use frequency (p=0.018). All types of information were rated high on usefulness, while some functions were rated low, such as blocking specific clinical notes from HCPs and managing services for family members. The main reason for reading their health records online was out of curiosity. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents who read their records online perceive it to be useful. Encouragement by HCPs can lead to increased use of patient portals among adolescents. Findings should be considered in the future design of patient portals for adolescents.

Security and Privacy of Online Record Access: A Survey of Adolescents' Views and Experiences in Sweden.

PURPOSE: Ensuring security of online health records and patients' perceptions of security are concerns in adolescent healthcare. Little is known about adolescents' perceptions about healthcare's ability to protect online health records. This article explores adolescents' perspectives on security and privacy of their online health records, potential differences based on gender and health, attitudes to sharing information, and perceptions of what constitutes sensitive information. METHODS: This study included a subset of items from a national online patient survey conducted in Sweden (January-February 2022), focusing on respondents aged 15-19 years. Gender and health status differences were calculated using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Of 218 adolescent respondents (77.1% female), a minority had security and privacy concerns. A notable proportion (41.3%) wished to control who could see their records, and those who reported better perceived health were more likely to want to manage access to their electronic health record (H = 13.569, p = .009). Most had not experienced unauthorized access to their records (75.2%) and had never shared health information on other online applications (85.8%). More than half (56.0%) perceived some information as sensitive, where mental health was the most common (76.0%). Most felt that reading their notes improved their trust for their healthcare professional (65.6%) and supported better communication with healthcare professionals (66.5%). DISCUSSION: In this national survey, adolescents generally reported few concerns about patient portals. Findings emphasize the need for security and privacy protection and to empower adolescents with greater control over access to their health information housed in electronic health record systems.

Experiences of Patients With Mental Health Issues Having Web-Based Access to Their Records: National Patient Survey.

BACKGROUND: Sharing mental health notes through patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) is controversial. Many psychiatric organizations and regions in Sweden have resisted the implementation, as clinicians worry about possible harms when patients are reading their notes. Despite the documented benefits of PAEHRs, there is still a lack of knowledge regarding whether patients with mental health issues could reap similar benefits of reading their notes as other patient groups. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to examine the use, attitudes, and experiences of patients with mental health issues by reading their notes in the PAEHR and, moreover, whether their experiences differ from other patient groups, and if so, how. METHODS: A national patient survey was conducted with answers from 2587 patients from different patient groups. In total, 504 respondents (19.5%) indicated that they experienced a mental health disease. Answers from this patient group were compared to the answers from all other respondents. Survey questions related to attitudes, information usage, and effects on contacts with care were selected for analysis. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to detect groupwise differences. RESULTS: Patients with mental health issues use PAEHRs for checking that they have received the right care (mean_mental health 2.83, SD_mental health 1.39; mean_others 2.62, SD_others 1.37; P=.002) or suspected inaccuracies (mean_mental health 2.55, SD_mental health 1.34; mean_others 2.31, SD_others 1.30; P=.001), blocking access for professionals in other specialties (mean_mental health 3.43, SD_mental health 1.46; mean_others 3.04, SD_others 1.42; P<.001), and checking which care professionals have accessed their record (mean_mental health 4.28, SD_mental health 1.14; mean_others 4.05, SD_others 1.25; P<.001) to a significantly higher degree than other patients. On the other hand, the results show that a significantly lower proportion of patients with mental health issues (mean_mental health 3.38, SD_mental health 1.21; mean_others 3.52, SD_others 1.18; P=.02) believe that PAEHRs help them in shared decision-making compared to other patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with mental health issues who took part in the survey, as a group, express some minor differences in both the use of the PAEHR and their experiences regarding its usefulness, as compared to other patients, as a group. This patient group shows a slightly higher interest in 2 types of use: checking for accuracy of care in the record and blocking access to mental health notes for professionals from other parts of the health care system. Compared to other patient groups, these patients are less likely to experience that the PAEHR is a support in shared decision-making. The study indicates that the benefits of PAEHR on a general level are the same for this patient group as for other patients. The study does not support clinicians' worry about possible harm to this patient group. Further research is however needed.

Adolescents' and Young Adults' Experiences of Offense from Reading Their Health Records Online.

Patients feeling offended by reading records online is a concern among healthcare professionals, however previously published work has focused on adult patients. Here, a survey was used to explore and compare experiences of offense among adolescents (15-19 years old) and young adults (20-24 years old). Findings indicated that while the ratio of those offended did not differ between adolescents and young adults, reasons for feeling offended did.

Benchmarking usability of patient portals in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden.

INTRODUCTION: Poor usability is a barrier to widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHR). Providing good usability is especially challenging in the health care context, as there is a wide variety of patient users. Usability benchmarking is an approach for improving usability by evaluating and comparing the strength and weaknesses of systems. The main purpose of this study is to benchmark usability of patient portals across countries. METHODS: A mixed-methods survey approach was applied to benchmark the national patient portals offering patient access to EHR in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. These Nordic countries have similar public healthcare systems, and they are pioneers in offering patients access to EHR for several years. In a survey of 29,334 patients, both patients' quantitative ratings of usability and their qualitative descriptions of very positive and very negative peak experiences of portal use were collected. RESULTS: The usability scores ranged from good to fair level of usability. The narratives of very positive and very negative experiences included the benefits of the patient portals and experienced usability issues. The regression analysis of results showed that very positive and negative experiences of patient portal use explain 19-35% of the variation of usability scores in the four countries. The percentage of patients who reported very positive or very negative experiences in each country was unrelated to the usability scores across countries. CONCLUSIONS: The survey approach could be used to evaluate usability with a wide variety of users and it supported learning from comparison across the countries. The combination of quantitative and qualitative data provided an approximation of the level of the perceived usability, and identified usability issues to be improved and useful features that patients appreciate. Further work is needed to improve the comparability of the varied samples across countries.

The NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey: Cross-Sectional Study of National Patient Portal Users in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia.

BACKGROUND: Although many surveys have been conducted on patients accessing their own health records in recent years, there is a limited amount of nationwide cross-country data available on patients' views and preferences. To address this gap, an international survey of patient users was conducted in the Nordic eHealth project, NORDeHEALTH. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the sociodemographic characteristics and experiences of patients who accessed their electronic health records (EHRs) through national patient portals in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was distributed using the national online health portals. The target participants were patients who accessed the national patient portals at the start of 2022 and who were aged ≥15 years. The survey included a mixture of close-ended and free-text questions about participant sociodemographics, usability experience, experiences with health care and the EHR, reasons for reading health records online, experience with errors, omissions and offense, opinions about security and privacy, and the usefulness of portal functions. In this paper, we summarized the data on participant demographics, past experience with health care, and the patient portal through descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In total, 29,334 users completed the survey, of which 9503 (32.40%) were from Norway, 13,008 (44.35%) from Sweden, 4713 (16.07%) from Finland, and 2104 (7.17%) from Estonia. National samples were comparable according to reported gender, with about two-thirds identifying as women (19,904/29,302, 67.93%). Age distributions were similar across the countries, but Finland had older users while Estonia had younger users. The highest attained education and presence of health care education varied among the national samples. In all 4 countries, patients most commonly rated their health as "fair" (11,279/29,302, 38.48%). In Estonia, participants were more often inclined to rate their health positively, whereas Norway and Sweden had the highest proportion of negative health ratings. Across the whole sample, most patients received some care in the last 2 years (25,318/29,254, 86.55%). Mental health care was more common (6214/29,254, 21.24%) than oncological care (3664/29,254, 12.52%). Overall, most patients had accessed their health record "2 to 9 times" (11,546/29,306, 39.4%), with the most frequent users residing in Sweden, where about one-third of patients accessed it "more than 20 times" (4571/13,008, 35.14%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first large-scale international survey to compare patient users' sociodemographics and experiences with accessing their EHRs. Although the countries are in close geographic proximity and demonstrate similar advancements in giving their residents online records access, patient users in this survey differed. We will continue to investigate patients' experiences and opinions about national patient-accessible EHRs through focused analyses of the national and combined data sets from the NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey.

Errors, Omissions, and Offenses in the Health Record of Mental Health Care Patients: Results from a Nationwide Survey in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Previous research reports that patients with mental health conditions experience benefits, for example, increased empowerment and validation, from reading their patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs). In mental health care (MHC), PAEHRs remain controversial, as health care professionals are concerned that patients may feel worried or offended by the content of the notes. Moreover, existing research has focused on specific mental health diagnoses, excluding the larger PAEHR userbase with experience in MHC. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to establish if and how the experiences of patients with and those without MHC differ in using their PAEHRs by (1) comparing patient characteristics and differences in using the national patient portal between the 2 groups and (2) establishing group differences in the prevalence of negative experiences, for example, rates of errors, omissions, and offenses between the 2 groups. METHODS: Our analysis was performed on data from an online patient survey distributed through the Swedish national patient portal as part of our international research project, NORDeHEALTH. The respondents were patient users of the national patient portal 1177, aged 15 years or older, and categorized either as those with MHC experience or with any other health care experience (nonmental health care [non-MHC]). Patient characteristics such as gender, age, education, employment, and health status were gathered. Portal use characteristics included frequency of access, encouragement to read the record, and instances of positive and negative experiences. Negative experiences were further explored through rates of error, omission, and offense. The data were summarized through descriptive statistics. Group differences were analyzed through Pearson chi-square. RESULTS: Of the total sample (N=12,334), MHC respondents (n=3131) experienced errors (1586/3131, 50.65%, and non-MHC 3311/9203, 35.98%), omissions (1089/3131, 34.78%, and non-MHC 2427/9203, 26.37%) and offenses (1183/3131, 37.78%, and non-MHC 1616/9203, 17.56%) in the electronic health record at a higher rate than non-MHC respondents (n=9203). Respondents reported that the identified error (MHC 795/3131, 50.13%, and non-MHC 1366/9203, 41.26%) and omission (MHC 622/3131, 57.12%, and non-MHC 1329/9203, 54.76%) were "very important," but most did nothing to correct them (MHC 792/3131, 41.29%, and non-MHC 1838/9203, 42.17%). Most of the respondents identified as women in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: About 1 in 2 MHC patients identified an error in the record, and about 1 in 3 identified an omission, both at a much higher rate than in the non-MHC group. Patients with MHC also felt offended by the content of the notes more commonly (1 in 3 vs 1 in 6). These findings validate some of the worries expressed by health care professionals about providing patients with MHC with PAEHRs and highlight challenges with the documentation quality in the records.

Minor and Parental Access to Electronic Health Records: Differences Across Four Countries.

An increasing number of countries are implementing patient access to electronic health records (EHR). However, EHR access for parents, children and adolescents presents ethical challenges of data integrity, and regulations vary across providers, regions, and countries. In the present study, we compare EHR access policy for parents, children and adolescents in four countries. Documentation from three areas: upper age limit of minors for which parents have access; age at which minors obtain access; and possibilities of access restriction and extension was collected from Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Estonia. Results showed that while all systems provided parents with automatic proxy access, age limits for its expiry differed. Furthermore, a lower minimum age than 18 for adolescent access was present in two of four countries. Differences between countries and potential implications for adolescents are discussed. We conclude that experiences of various approaches should be explored to promote the development of EHR regulations for parents, children and adolescents that increases safety, quality, and equality of care.

Patients' Access to Their Psychiatric Records - A Comparison of Four Countries.

Several Nordic and Baltic countries are forerunners in the digitalization of patient ehealth services and have since long implemented psychiatric records as parts of the ehealth services. There are country-specific differences in what clinical information is offered to patients concerning their online patient accessible psychiatric records. This study explores national differences in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Estonia in patient access to their psychiatric records. Data was collected through a socio-technical data collection template developed during a workshop series and then analyzed in a cross-country comparison focusing on items related to psychiatry records online. The results show that psychiatric records online are offered to patients in all four countries, and provide the same functionality and similar psychiatry information. Overall, the conclusion is that experiences of various functionalities should be scrutinized to promote transparency of psychiatric records as part of the national eHealth services to increase equality of care and patient empowerment.

Do you want to receive bad news through your patient accessible electronic health record? A national survey on receiving bad news in an era of digital health.

Despite the fact that patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) have been around for many years in several countries, there is a lack of research investigating patient's preferences for receiving bad news, including through PAEHRs. Little is also known about the characteristics of the patients who prefer to receive bad news through the PAEHR in terms of, for example medical diagnosis, age and educational level. This study, based on a national patient survey in Sweden (N = 2587), investigated this. Results show that, generally, receiving bad news by reading in the PAEHR is still among the least preferred options. Additionally, a higher proportion of men want to receive bad news in the PAEHR compared to women (p = 0.001), and the same goes for those who are not working/have worked in healthcare (p = 0.007). An effect of disease groups was also found, showing that diabetes patients in particular, want to receive bad news through the PAEHR.

Online electronic healthcare records: Comparing the views of cancer patients and others.

This study investigates differences in attitudes towards, and experiences with, online electronic health records between cancer patients and patients with other conditions, highlighting what is characteristic to cancer patients. A national patient survey on online access to electronic health records was conducted, where cancer patients were compared with all other respondents. Overall, 2587 patients completed the survey (response rate 0.61%). A total of 347 respondents (13.4%) indicated that they suffered from cancer. Results showed that cancer patients are less likely than other patients to use online electronic health records due to general interest (p < 0.001), but more likely for getting an overview of their health history (p = 0.001) and to prepare for visits (p < 0.001). Moreover, cancer patients rate benefits of accessing their electronic health records online higher than other patients and see larger positive effects regarding improved communication with and involvement in healthcare.

On Patient Accessible Electronic Health Records and the Experienced Effect on the Work Environment of Nurses.

The work environment for nurses is challenging, and even though new technology has major advantages, it has often also caused new stressors and problems for nurses. When Patient Accessible Electronic Health Records (PAEHR) was introduced in Sweden, research showed that nurses were worried about possible negative effects for patients as well as on their work. However, to this date there are very few follow up studies on the more long term effects of PAEHR, despite research pointing to the fact that reactions after long term use might differ from initial experiences. In this paper we present an interview study to fill this research gap. An analysis based on interviews with physicians and nurses in Oncology care reveals three areas where nurses' work is experienced to have been affected: 1) nurses receive more questions from patients after PAEHR has been introduced, 2) nurses have changed their documentation practices and 3) the log list functionality has made nurses feel questioned. Finally, these results are discussed in relation to nurses' work environment from a sociotechnical and gender perspective.

The Effect of Patient Accessible Electronic Health Records on Communication and Involvement in Care - A National Patient Survey in Sweden.

During recent years, patient accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) have been implemented nationally in Sweden, as well as internationally, as a means of supporting patient engagement and shared decision making. Few studies have, however, investigated the long-term effects of PAEHRs on communicaiton with care professionals and involvement in care. The national survey study presented here, answered by 2587 patients in Sweden, focuses on these aspects specifically. The results show that the Swedish PAEHR system Journalen has had a positive impact on communication with care overall (84% agree or strongly agree with that communication with medical staff has improved), but only 31% agree or strongly agree with that the content of the PAEHR is discussed with care professionals. Journalen also seems to have a positive impact on involvement in care, but the results are mixed when it comes to effects on shared decision making.

'I do not share it with others. No, it's for me, it's my care': On sharing of patient accessible electronic health records.

This study explores patients' perspectives on sharing their personal health data, which is traditionally shared through discussions with peers and relatives. However, other possibilities for sharing have emerged through the introduction of online services such as Patient Accessible Electronic Health Records (PAEHR). In this article, we investigate strategies that patients adopt in sharing their PAEHR. Data were collected through a survey with 2587 patients and through 15 semi-structured interviews with cancer patients. Results show that surprisingly few patients share their information, and that older patients and patients with lower educational levels share more frequently. A large majority of patients trust the security of the system when sharing despite the high sensitivity of health information. Finally, we discuss the design implications addressing identified problems when sharing PAEHR, as well as security and privacy issues connected to sharing.

Oncology health-care professionals' perceived effects of patient accessible electronic health records 6 years after launch: A survey study at a major university hospital in Sweden.

Patient accessible electronic health records have been launched in many countries, and generally, health-care professionals have had strong initial concerns related to the areas patient contact, documentation practices and quality of care. Especially, oncology care was discussed in media when launching patient accessible electronic health records in Sweden. However, few studies have investigated clinician-perceived effects several years after the launch. A survey covering these areas, as well as supposed effects for patients, was distributed to oncology health-care professionals 6 years after the launch of patient accessible electronic health records and answered by N = 176. Results show that patient accessible electronic health records have had small effects within the covered areas, and that the area most affected was documentation practices. Very few significant differences could be found between physicians and nurses. A comparison with results from interviews and surveys conducted shortly after the launch of patient accessible electronic health records clearly indicates that the experienced negative effects are not as big as originally feared.

Impact of device programming on the success of the first anti-tachycardia pacing therapy: An anonymized large-scale study.

BACKGROUND: Antitachycardia pacing (ATP) is an effective treatment for ventricular tachycardia (VT). We evaluated the efficacy of different ATP programs based on a large remote monitoring data set from patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). METHODS: A dataset from 18,679 ICD patients was used to evaluate the first delivered ATP treatment. We considered all device programs that were used for at least 50 patients, leaving us with 7 different programs and a total of 32,045 episodes. We used the two-proportions z-test (α = 0.01) to compare the probability of success and the probability for acceleration in each group with the corresponding values of the default setting. RESULTS: Overall, the first ATP treatment terminated in 78.4%-97.5% of episodes with slow VT and 81.5%-91.1% of episodes with fast VT. The default setting of the ATP programs with the number of sequences S = 3 was applied to treat 30.1% of the slow and 36.6% of the fast episodes. Reducing the maximum number of sequences to S = 2 decreased the success rate for slow VT (P < 0.0001, h = 0.38), while the setting S = 4 resulted in the highest success rate of 97.5% (P < 0.0001, h = 0.27). CONCLUSION: While the default programs performed well, we found that increasing the number of sequences from 3 to 4 was a promising option to improve the overall ATP performance.

Unpacking telemonitoring work: Workload and telephone calls to patients in implanted cardiac device care.

OBJECTIVE: Telemonitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has many advantages. However, telemonitoring involves clinical work that is often overlooked or considered a burden, such as the work performed during telephone contact with patients. The objective of this study was to scrutinize telephone calls to and from patients to understand the clinical workload in CIED remote monitoring. The focus was on time spent, type of work, and the content of telephone contact with patients. METHODS: A combined quantitative and qualitative observational study was conducted at a large CIED remote monitoring center. The unit 'encounter' was used to describe either a telephone call between patient and clinician and/or a complete review of a CIED data transmission. The time spent on different encounters was measured, the telephone call content was identified and described, and the different types of clinical work were described. RESULTS: A total of 260 encounters were analyzed. Encounters that involved patient telephone contact were more time consuming. Telephone calls were mostly about the home monitoring box, CIED transmission data, and symptoms. In most telephone calls, two or more topics appeared. Five types of clinical work were performed: inclusion work, coordination work, diagnostic work, education work, and comfort work. Inclusion work and diagnostic work were the dominant types. DISCUSSION: Patient telephone contact in CIED telemonitoring is typically described as a "burden". This study unpacks the contents and functions of telephone calls between patients and clinicians and suggests that the function of telephone contact should be recognized as integral, rather than burdensome, to the clinical work in CIED telemonitoring.

Impact of sweep gas flow on extracorporeal CO2 removal (ECCO2R).

BACKGROUND: Veno-venous extracorporeal carbon dioxide (CO2) removal (vv-ECCO2R) is increasingly being used in the setting of acute respiratory failure. Blood flow rates range in clinical practice from 200 mL/min to more than 1500 mL/min, and sweep gas flow rates range from less than 1 to more than 10 L/min. The present porcine model study was aimed at determining the impact of varying sweep gas flow rates on CO2 removal under different blood flow conditions and membrane lung surface areas. METHODS: Two different membrane lungs, with surface areas of 0.4 and 0.8m2, were used in nine pigs with experimentally-induced hypercapnia. During each experiment, the blood flow was increased stepwise from 300 to 900 mL/min, with further increases up to 1800 mL/min with the larger membrane lung in steps of 300 mL/min. Sweep gas was titrated under each condition from 2 to 8 L/min in steps of 2 L/min. Extracorporeal CO2 elimination was normalized to a PaCO2 of 45 mmHg before the membrane lung. RESULTS: Reversal of hypercapnia was only feasible when blood flow rates above 900 mL/min were used with a membrane lung surface area of at least 0.8m2. The membrane lung with a surface of 0.4m2 allowed a maximum normalized CO2 elimination rate of 41 ± 6 mL/min with 8 L/min sweep gas flow and 900 mL blood flow/min. The increase in sweep gas flow from 2 to 8 L/min increased normalized CO2 elimination from 35 ± 5 to 41 ± 6 with 900 mL blood flow/min, whereas with lower blood flow rates, any increase was less effective, levelling out at 4 L sweep gas flow/min. The membrane lung with a surface area of 0.8m2 allowed a maximum normalized CO2 elimination rate of 101 ± 12 mL/min with increasing influence of sweep gas flow. The delta of normalized CO2 elimination increased from 4 ± 2 to 26 ± 7 mL/min with blood flow rates being increased from 300 to 1800 mL/min, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The influence of sweep gas flow on the CO2 removal capacity of ECCO2R systems depends predominantly on blood flow rate and membrane lung surface area. In this model, considerable CO2 removal occurred only with the larger membrane lung surface of 0.8m2 and when blood flow rates of ≥ 900 mL/min were used.

Predicting electrical storms by remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients using machine learning.

AIMS: Electrical storm (ES) is a serious arrhythmic syndrome that is characterized by recurrent episodes of ventricular arrhythmias. Electrical storm is associated with increased mortality and morbidity despite the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). Predicting ES could be essential; however, models for predicting this event have never been developed. The goal of this study was to construct and validate machine learning models to predict ES based on daily ICD remote monitoring summaries. METHODS AND RESULTS: Daily ICD summaries from 19 935 patients were used to construct and evaluate two models [logistic regression (LR) and random forest (RF)] for predicting the short-term risk of ES. The models were evaluated on the parts of the data not used for model development. Random forest performed significantly better than LR (P < 0.01), achieving a test accuracy of 0.96 and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80 (vs. an accuracy of 0.96 and an AUC of 0.75). The percentage of ventricular pacing and the daytime activity were the most relevant variables in the RF model. CONCLUSION: The use of large-scale machine learning showed that daily summaries of ICD measurements in the absence of clinical information can predict the short-term risk of ES.