Perspectives

ICD Discussions: Closing the Gap between What We Say and What They Understand

Authors: Miriam Zylberglait Lisigurski, MD, Marlena Fernandez, MD, Binna Chokshi, MD, Nader Lamaa, MD, Hamid Feiz, MD

Abstract

More than 20 million adults worldwide have a diagnosis of heart failure (HF).1 The prevalence in the United States is expected to increase by 46% from 2012 to 2030, resulting in an increase from 5 million to 8 million Americans living with this condition.2 Approximately 50% of people diagnosed as having HF will die within 5 years.1 Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are considered the standard of care to prevent sudden cardiac death in high-risk patients with HF. Approximately 800,000 Americans have an ICD3 and >100,000 devices are implanted annually. Of those devices, 50,000 are inserted in patients 65 years and older, with >40% of patients aged 70 years and older.4

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Kini V, Kirkpatrick JN. Ethical challenges in advanced heart failure. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care 2013;7:21-28.
 
2. McIlvennan CK, Allen LA. Palliative care in patients with heart failure. BMJ 2016;353:i1010.
 
3. Benjamin MM, Sorkness CA. Practical and ethical considerations in the management of pacemaker and implantable cardiac defibrillator devices in terminally ill patients. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 2017;30:157-160.
 
4. Kramer DB, Reynolds MR, Normand SL, et al. Hospice use following implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in older patients: results from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circulation 2016;133:2030-2037.
 
5. Hill L, McIlfatrick S, Taylor BJ, et al. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) deactivation discussions: reality versus recommendations. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2016;15:20-29.
 
6. Hauptman PJ, Chibnall JT, Guild C, et al. Patient perceptions, physician communication, and the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:571-577.
 
7. Schoenthaler A, Kalet A, Nicholson J, et al. Does improving patient-practitioner communication improve clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular diseases? A systematic review of the evidence. Patient Educ Couns 2014;96:3-12.
 
8. Caverly TJ, Al-Khatib SM, Kutner JS, et al. Patient preference in the decision to place implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:1104-1107.
 
9. Ezzat VA, Lee V, Ahsan S, et al. A systematic review of ICD complications in randomised controlled trials versus registries: is our ‘-world’ data an underestimation? Open Heart 2015;2:e000198.
 
10. Merchant FM, Quest T, Leon AR, et al. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators at end of battery life: opportunities for risk (re)-stratification in ICD recipients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;67:435-444.
 
11. Goldstein NE, Kalman J, Kutner JS, et al. A study to improve communication between clinicians and patients with advanced heart failure: methods and challenges behind the working to improve discussions about defibrillator management trial. J Pain Symptom Manage 2014;48:1236-1246.
 
12. Kyle S, Shaw D. Doctor-patient communication, patient knowledge and health literacy: how difficult can it all be? R Coll Surg Engl Bull doi.org/10.1308/rcsbull.2014.96.6.e9.
 
13. Meyers DE, Goodlin SJ. End-of-life decisions and palliative care in advanced heart failure. Can J Cardiol 2016;32:1148-1156.