Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2010
Attitudes towards implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy: a national survey in Danish health-care professionals.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Johansen Jens B, Mortensen Peter T, Videbæk Regitze, Riahi Sam, Møller Mogens, Haarbo Jens, Pedersen Susanne S
Аннотация
AIMS: The aim of this study was to examine health-care professionals attitudes towards implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy and issues discussed with patients.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Survey of 209 health-care professionals providing specialized treatment and care of ICD patients at the five implanting centres in Denmark. Questions pertained to gender, age, years of experience within the field, knowledge of the ongoing critical debate on ICD therapy, and personal experience with ICD treatment, and/or sudden cardiac arrest within family and/or friends. Of all participants, 185 (88.5%) completed the survey. Physicians spent less time informing patients about ICD treatment prior to implantation (mean min = 17.7 ± 11.2 vs. 28.6 ± 19.4; P < 0.001). They were more likely to discuss clinical issues but less likely to discuss psychosocial issues with patients compared with non-physicians. Physicians were less likely to believe that their personal attitude towards ICD treatment has no influence on how they deal professionally with patients (27.8 vs. 43.6%; P = 0.04). Physicians and non-physicians were equally positive towards ICD therapy as primary prophylaxis in ischaemic cardiomyopathy (87.6 vs. 82.1%; P = 0.40) but not in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (57.3 vs. 83.9%; P < 0.001). Physicians were more positive towards ICD therapy as secondary prophylaxis (98.9 vs. 84.2%; P = 0.001) compared with non-physicians.
CONCLUSIONS: Physicians focus on clinical rather than psychosocial issues when discussing ICD treatment with candidate patients. At the same time, physicians are more aware that their attitude towards ICD treatment may influence how they deal professionally with patients compared with non-physicians.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Survey of 209 health-care professionals providing specialized treatment and care of ICD patients at the five implanting centres in Denmark. Questions pertained to gender, age, years of experience within the field, knowledge of the ongoing critical debate on ICD therapy, and personal experience with ICD treatment, and/or sudden cardiac arrest within family and/or friends. Of all participants, 185 (88.5%) completed the survey. Physicians spent less time informing patients about ICD treatment prior to implantation (mean min = 17.7 ± 11.2 vs. 28.6 ± 19.4; P < 0.001). They were more likely to discuss clinical issues but less likely to discuss psychosocial issues with patients compared with non-physicians. Physicians were less likely to believe that their personal attitude towards ICD treatment has no influence on how they deal professionally with patients (27.8 vs. 43.6%; P = 0.04). Physicians and non-physicians were equally positive towards ICD therapy as primary prophylaxis in ischaemic cardiomyopathy (87.6 vs. 82.1%; P = 0.40) but not in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (57.3 vs. 83.9%; P < 0.001). Physicians were more positive towards ICD therapy as secondary prophylaxis (98.9 vs. 84.2%; P = 0.001) compared with non-physicians.
CONCLUSIONS: Physicians focus on clinical rather than psychosocial issues when discussing ICD treatment with candidate patients. At the same time, physicians are more aware that their attitude towards ICD treatment may influence how they deal professionally with patients compared with non-physicians.