Comparison of 24-hour Holter Monitoring with 14-day Novel Adhesive Patch Electrocardiographic Monitoring

Authors: Paddy M. Barrett, MB, Ravi Komatireddy, MD, Sharon Haaser, RN, Sarah Topol, RN, Judith Sheard, MPH, Jackie Encinas, MS, Angela J. Fought, MS, Eric J. Topol, MD

Summary:

Simultaneous wear study comparing 14-day Zio to a traditional 24-hour Holter.

Key Findings:

LTCM detected 57% more arrhythmias than 24-hour Holter monitoring.

Definitive diagnosis was achieved in 90% of LTCM cases vs. only 64% with Holter monitoring.

81% of patients preferred LTCM over Holter monitoring.

The content on iRhythm Academy is provided for general educational purposes only and should not be considered the exclusive source for this type of information. This training does not replace or supersede approved labeling. The content will be shared with physicians and healthcare professionals who seek a deeper understanding of the operation and use of iRhythm products and services with the intent of enhancing their knowledge of features and operations described in the clinician manuals. At all times, it is the professional responsibility of the physicians and healthcare professionals to exercise independent clinical judgment in a particular situation. The device and service functionality and programming described on iRhythm Academy are based on its products and services, and can be referenced in the labeling and reference manuals. This website is intended for healthcare professionals and not intended for patients or consumers.