American journal of critical care : an official publication, American Association of Critical-Care Nurses · 1995
Perceived quality of life before and after implantation of an internal cardioverter defibrillator.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bainger E M, Fernsler J I
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although use of the internal cardioverter defibrillator in selected high-risk patient groups has significantly improved survival, questions have arisen regarding its impact on psychological adjustment and quality of life.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there was a difference in perceived quality of life of internal cardioverter defibrillator recipients before implantation, reported retrospectively, and after implantation.
METHODS: Survey packets containing a demographic data form, a modified version of the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index: Cardiac Version, and a consent form were mailed to internal cardioverter defibrillator recipients accrued from two hospitals; 70 patients comprised the convenience sample.
RESULTS: No significant difference in perceived overall quality of life was revealed by before and after implantation scores of t tests or analyses of variance. Young, unemployed patients with multiple health problems were most at risk for quality of life deficits. Overall, recipients in this study appeared to adapt effectively to the stresses associated with the device.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the internal cardioverter defibrillator did not prolong life at a sacrifice to quality of life. These findings can help identify patients at increased risk for quality of life deficits.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there was a difference in perceived quality of life of internal cardioverter defibrillator recipients before implantation, reported retrospectively, and after implantation.
METHODS: Survey packets containing a demographic data form, a modified version of the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index: Cardiac Version, and a consent form were mailed to internal cardioverter defibrillator recipients accrued from two hospitals; 70 patients comprised the convenience sample.
RESULTS: No significant difference in perceived overall quality of life was revealed by before and after implantation scores of t tests or analyses of variance. Young, unemployed patients with multiple health problems were most at risk for quality of life deficits. Overall, recipients in this study appeared to adapt effectively to the stresses associated with the device.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the internal cardioverter defibrillator did not prolong life at a sacrifice to quality of life. These findings can help identify patients at increased risk for quality of life deficits.