Psychological Indices as Predictors for Phantom Shocks in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Recipients

Starrenburg, Annemieke; Kraaier, Karin; Pedersen, Susanne; Scholten, Marcoen F.; Palen, Job van der

doi:10.1111/pace.12343

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of primary concern is the presence or absence of defibrillation in patients presenting with the perception that they have been shocked. Not infrequently, these patients turn out to have experienced a “phantom shock” and did not actually experience defibrillation at all [ 9 ]. Additionally, data on atrial fibrillation burden, degree of physical activity of the patient and the intrathoracic impedance as a measure of pulmonary congestion can help characterize the presence and degree of heart failure in patients whose devices have that capability [ 10 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and efficiency of emergency department interrogation of cardiac devices

Neuenschwander¹,

Peacock²,

Migeed³

et al. 2016

Clin Exp Emerg Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivePatients with implanted cardiac devices may wait extended periods for interrogation in emergency departments (EDs). Our purpose was to determine if device interrogation could be done safely and faster by ED staff.MethodsProspective randomized, standard therapy controlled, trial of ED staff device interrogation vs. standard process (SP), with 30-day follow-up. Eligibility criteria: ED presentation with a self-report of a potential device related complaint, with signed informed consent. SP interrogation was by company representative or hospital employee.ResultsOf 60 patients, 42 (70%) were male, all were white, with a median (interquartile range) age of 71 (64 to 82) years. No patient was lost to follow up. Of all patients, 32 (53%) were enrolled during business hours. The overall median (interquartile range) ED vs. SP time to interrogation was 98.5 (40 to 260) vs. 166.5 (64 to 412) minutes (P=0.013). While ED and SP interrogation times were similar during business hours, 102 (59 to 138) vs. 105 (64 to 172) minutes (P=0.62), ED interrogation times were shorter vs. SP during non-business hours; 97 (60 to 126) vs. 225 (144 to 412) minutes, P=0.002, respectively. There was no difference in ED length of stay between the ED and SP interrogation, 249 (153 to 390) vs. 246 (143 to 333) minutes (P=0.71), regardless of time of presentation. No patient in any cohort suffered an unplanned medical contact or post-discharge adverse device related event.ConclusionED staff cardiac device interrogations are faster, and with similar 30-day outcomes, as compared to SP.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and efficiency of emergency department interrogation of cardiac devices

Neuenschwander¹,

Peacock²,

Migeed³

et al. 2016

Clin Exp Emerg Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Det er anslått at 5-10 prosent av pasienter med ICD opplever fenomenet (15)(16)(17). En hendelse med fantomsjokk kan ikke måles objektivt, og krever at pasienten selv må melde fra for å få det dokumentert.…”

Section: Fantomsjokkunclassified

“…Kun objektive sjokk er funnet som risiko for å utvikle fantomsjokk. Flere studier enes om at det per nå ikke er funnet andre disponerende faktorer (15)(16)(17). Manglende evidens i forhold til årsaksforhold medfører et behov for sykepleie som styrker pasientens evne til å mestre fantomsjokk.…”

Section: Hvordan Oppstår Fantomsjokk?unclassified

“…Hypotesen var at pasienter med tidligere angst eller depresjon, eller symptomer på dette ved implantasjonstidspunktet, har økt risiko for fantomsjokk i løpet av de første to årene. Ingen signifikante sammenhenger ble funnet, og hypotesen ble avkreftet (16).…”

Section: Livslang Tilpasningunclassified

“…På den andre siden er kun alder og kjønn tatt med som demografiske variabler, og andre variabler kan tenkes å spille en rolle i utviklingen av fantomsjokk. Gruppen med fantomsjokk var i tillegg liten, noe som kan tenkes å vaere en årsak til at funnene ikke var signifikante (16).…”

Section: Livslang Tilpasningunclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations