open access
Physicians’ knowledge and attitudes regarding implantable cardioverter-defibrillators
open access
Abstract
Methods: We conducted a survey of primary care physicians and cardiologists at the University of Rochester Medical Center and the Unity Health System Rochester, NY from December 2008 to February 2009. The survey collected information regarding physicians’ knowledge of and attitudes towards ICD therapy.
Results: Of the 332 surveys distributed, 110 (33%) were returned. Over-all 94 (87%) physicians reported referring patients for ICD implantation. Eighteen (17%) physicians reported unawareness of guidelines for ICD use. Sixty-four (59%) physicians recommended ICD in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35%. Sixty-five (62%) physicians use ≤ 35% as the LVEF criterion for ICD referral in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. Cardiologists were more familiar than primary care physicians with LVEF criteria for implantation of ICD in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (p value 0.005 and 0.002, respectively). Twenty-nine (27%) participants were unsure regarding the benefits of ICDs in eligible women and blacks. Eighty two (76%) physicians believed that an ICD could benefit patients ≥ 70 years old, whereas only 53 (49%) indicated that an ICD would benefit patients ≥ 80.
Conclusions: A lack of familiarity with current clinical guidelines regarding ICD implantation exists. Primary care physicians are less aware of clinical guidelines than are cardiologists. This finding highlights the need to improve the dissemination of guidelines to primary care physicians in an effort to improve ICD utilization.
(Cardiol J 2010; 17, 3: 267-273)
Abstract
Methods: We conducted a survey of primary care physicians and cardiologists at the University of Rochester Medical Center and the Unity Health System Rochester, NY from December 2008 to February 2009. The survey collected information regarding physicians’ knowledge of and attitudes towards ICD therapy.
Results: Of the 332 surveys distributed, 110 (33%) were returned. Over-all 94 (87%) physicians reported referring patients for ICD implantation. Eighteen (17%) physicians reported unawareness of guidelines for ICD use. Sixty-four (59%) physicians recommended ICD in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35%. Sixty-five (62%) physicians use ≤ 35% as the LVEF criterion for ICD referral in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. Cardiologists were more familiar than primary care physicians with LVEF criteria for implantation of ICD in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (p value 0.005 and 0.002, respectively). Twenty-nine (27%) participants were unsure regarding the benefits of ICDs in eligible women and blacks. Eighty two (76%) physicians believed that an ICD could benefit patients ≥ 70 years old, whereas only 53 (49%) indicated that an ICD would benefit patients ≥ 80.
Conclusions: A lack of familiarity with current clinical guidelines regarding ICD implantation exists. Primary care physicians are less aware of clinical guidelines than are cardiologists. This finding highlights the need to improve the dissemination of guidelines to primary care physicians in an effort to improve ICD utilization.
(Cardiol J 2010; 17, 3: 267-273)
Keywords
implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; physician’s knowledge; gender and racial disparities


Title
Physicians’ knowledge and attitudes regarding implantable cardioverter-defibrillators
Journal
Issue
Pages
267-273
Published online
2010-05-28
Page views
644
Article views/downloads
1098
Bibliographic record
Cardiol J 2010;17(3):267-273.
Keywords
implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
physician’s knowledge
gender and racial disparities
Authors
Saadia Sherazi
Wojciech Zaręba
James P. Daubert
Scott McNitt
Abrar H. Shah
Mehmet K. Aktas
Robert C. Block