For instance, implantable defibrillators decrease risk of mortality for some patients with heart failure by shocking their heart back into normal rhythm.īut, notice: These examples are for technology targeted to specific groups with significant heart problems, the people we know will benefit most. Other wearable devices not only monitor conditions, but also deliver lifesaving treatment. Already, wearable heart monitors for stroke patients can more reliably diagnose irregular heartbeats so doctors can intervene to decrease the risk of subsequent strokes. The data such widespread monitoring would generate might enhance researchers’ ability to learn early cues to potential problems. Out of curiosity, an abundance of caution, or for fitness reasons, people will monitor their hearts’ rhythms not just when their doctors order them to, but all the time. If the physical, mental and financial cost of collecting data about one’s body falls, more will take advantage of the technology. Even today, my heart’s rhythm could have been assessed with a Band-Aid-like patch, requiring no wires or bulky monitor.
Technology will advance so that we will soon be able to unobtrusively monitor a wide range of our bodies’ processes - heart rhythm, blood pressure, blood sugar and more - generating streams of personal health data. Eric Topol, a cardiologist and director of the Scripps Translational Science Institute, imagines such a future. Technology improvements will reduce inconveniences like these to patients. (Have no fear, I subsequently plugged back in when I felt the double beat and captured the recording that would confirm my doctor’s original diagnosis: benign.) Within a day, I unplugged and immediately felt liberated. (I mean the psychological costs, although my insurance company was billed about $2,200, of which it only paid about $100. The cost proved too high, particularly since I was uncertain that I even needed 24/7 monitoring. These inconveniences were like small physical and psychological co-payments, increasing the cost of the test to me, the patient. I felt tethered to, not freed by, technology. I felt concerned looks whenever the monitor was in plain view.
The bulk of the recorder on my belt poked my waist, hampering movement. The wires tickled my torso and puffed out my shirt. With onboard software, it continuously monitored for signs of a heart attack.Īs amazing as this technology is, it wasn’t amazing enough. Electrodes on my chest fed my heart’s rhythm, over wires, to a recorder on my belt, which wirelessly communicated the data to my physician. When applied to a population at very low risk, a great deal of it does little but add to our health care bill, waste patients’ time and lead to unnecessary procedures, which carry their own risks.Īfter the exchange of a few emails, my doctor ordered an at-home, 30-day heart monitor. When applied to the population with the right risk factors, various tests of the heart can save lives. Some are valuable for some people but are used in a great many more for whom it is wasteful. The health economists Amitabh Chandra and Jonathan Skinner tell a cautionary tale about medical technologies like advanced imaging and testing.
0 kommentar(er)
