Given the superior outcome of MCT regarding both patient care and hospital savings, hospitals only stand to gain by enforcing protocols that favor the MCT system over the Event or the Holter monitor.
A comprehensive study evaluated the effectiveness of mobile cardiac telemetry (MCT) compared to traditional Holter and Event monitors in detecting arrhythmias, guiding treatment, and reducing hospital costs.

Study Overview:

• Data Source: Analysis of over 200,000 patients from January 2007 to September 2011.

• Patient Groups: 14,000 used MCT, 54,000 used Event monitors, and 163,000 used Holter monitors.

• Methodology: A pair-wise pre/post test-control approach ensured comparable groups based on age, location, cardiovascular diagnosis, and medication use.

Key Findings:

1. Diagnostic Yield: MCT detected arrhythmias in 61% of cases, significantly higher than Event (23%) and Holter monitors (24%).

2. Therapeutic Initiation: Among patients not previously on antiarrhythmic drugs, 61% began therapy after MCT monitoring, compared to 39% with Event and 43% with Holter monitors.

3. Cost Savings: Patients monitored with MCT experienced substantial inpatient cardiovascular savings, particularly for procedures like ablation, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and valve surgeries.

Conclusion:

MCT offers superior diagnostic capabilities, more effective initiation of therapy, and significant cost reductions in hospital settings compared to traditional monitoring methods.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3862588/

Jul 01, 2025