Resource utilization associated with hospital and office-based insertion of a miniaturized insertable cardiac monitor: results from the RIO 2 randomized US study.

Previous studies support operational benefits when moving insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) insertions outside the cardiac catheterization/electrophysiology laboratories, but this has not been directly assessed in a randomized trial or when the procedure is specifically moved to the office setting. To gain insight, the RIO 2 US study collected resource utilization and procedure time intervals for ICM insertion in-office and in-hospital and these data were used to calculate costs associated with staff time and supply use in each setting. The Reveal LINQ In-Office 2 US study (randomized [1:1], multicenter, unblinded) included 482 patients to undergo insertion of the ICM in-hospital (in an operating room or CATH/EP laboratory) ( = 251) or in-office ( = 231). Detailed information on resource utilization was collected prospectively by the study and used to compare resource utilization and procedure time intervals during ICM insertion procedures performed in-office vs. in-hospital. In addition, costs associated with staff time and supply use in each setting were calculated retrospectively. Total visit duration (check-in to discharge) was 107 min shorter in-office vs. in-hospital (95% CI = 97-116 min;  < 0.001). Patient preparation and education in-office were more likely to occur in the same room as the procedure, compared with in-hospital (91.6% vs. 34.2%,  < 0.001 and 87.3% vs. 22.1%,  < 0.001, respectively). There was a reduction in registered nurse and cardiovascular/operating room technologist involvement in-office, accompanied by higher physician and medical assistant participation. Overall staff time spent per case was 75% higher in-hospital, leading to 50% higher staffing costs compared to in-office. ICM insertion in a physician's office vs. a hospital setting resulted in reduced patient visit time and reduced overall staff time, with a consequent reduction in staffing costs. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02395536.