A new peer-reviewed study states that the Zio monitor is as accurate as an implanted pacemaker, the gold standard of monitoring, in detecting AF burden.
It also outperformed other external cardiac monitors (ECM) and an event monitor in AF burden detection.
“[This] is a true test of the accuracy of ECM devices.”2
—Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, 2019
The Zio monitor recorded an R2 of 0.9999, the highest in the study, and an MSE of 0.2371, the lowest in the study.2
Holter monitoring has a low diagnostic yield of 24%1,
but the deficiencies don’t stop there.
A Medicare analysis found that repeat Holter testing occurred in 23% of monitored patients and that a failed repeat Holter test costs more than $23,000 per patient.3
Inaccurate data and repeat testing result in: