CVRS Co-founder Amber Seiler shares insights into the abstract “Unscheduled Transmission Burden and Actionable Yield Across Alert Types in a Large Remote Monitoring Population,” presented at HRS 2026.
Are certain transmissions more likely to be clinically meaningful than others? The answer this study found was yes.
Looking at over 15,000 transmissions from more than 6,000 patients in a 12-month period, it was found that only 15% of unscheduled transmissions were clinically meaningful. These clinically meaningful transmissions, all unscheduled, varied greatly by alert type. AFIB and VT/VF alerts were the most likely to be clinically actionable, while False ILRs and no device-defined alerts contributed disproportionately to the non-actionable workload.
Each type of alert that produced noise in the form of unscheduled transmissions also carried important, actionable items. There’s no single category that can be disregarded when it comes to alert management. But, knowing what alerts are most likely to produce non-actionable transmissions can help us reprogram efficiently, and cut down on the noise.
Unscheduled Transmission Burden and Actionable Yield Across Alert Types in a Large Remote Monitoring Population:
At CV Remote Solutions, we work with clinics to standardize workflows, optimize alert programming, and build the operational layer that makes remote monitoring sustainable. Schedule a consultation with a clinician here.