open access

Vol 13, No 4 (2018)
Young Cardiology
Published online: 2018-09-12
Get Citation

Continuity of cardiac care in patients after implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices

Marcin Paweł Madziarski, Maciej Ornat, Marta Idzior, Agnieszka Kania, Tomasz Bańkowski, Marta Negrusz-Kawecka
DOI: 10.5603/FC.2018.0067
·
Folia Cardiologica 2018;13(4):298-302.

open access

Vol 13, No 4 (2018)
Young Cardiology
Published online: 2018-09-12

Abstract

Introduction. Cardiac care continuum is an important factor affecting the treatment of patients after implantation of cardiac support devices. The aim of this paper was to assess the factors influencing compliance among 179 (67 women / 112 men, aged 76.7 ± 8.6 years) randomly selected patients with implanted electrotherapy devices.

Material and methods. This was a retrospective and open study. Required data were obtained from patients’ medical history and questionnaires completed during follow-up visits and from patients’ medical records.

Results. It was shown that men were more likely to attend follow-up visits than women (p = 0.002), residents of large towns (over 100.000 population) more likely than residents of smaller towns (p = 0.02), patients under 65 years of age (p < 0.05) more likely than older patients and self-sufficient patients more likely than those needing others’ assistance (p < 0.05). Patients living closer to the clinic (distance up to 50 km) and regularly taking medicines were not more compliant with their scheduled cardiology visits.

Conclusions. There are some factors associated with insufficient cooperation in the continuity of cardiac care in patients after implantation of cardiac support devices. Individual approach to patients who are non-compliant may be helpful in changing individual behaviors, which will result in treatment compliance.

Abstract

Introduction. Cardiac care continuum is an important factor affecting the treatment of patients after implantation of cardiac support devices. The aim of this paper was to assess the factors influencing compliance among 179 (67 women / 112 men, aged 76.7 ± 8.6 years) randomly selected patients with implanted electrotherapy devices.

Material and methods. This was a retrospective and open study. Required data were obtained from patients’ medical history and questionnaires completed during follow-up visits and from patients’ medical records.

Results. It was shown that men were more likely to attend follow-up visits than women (p = 0.002), residents of large towns (over 100.000 population) more likely than residents of smaller towns (p = 0.02), patients under 65 years of age (p < 0.05) more likely than older patients and self-sufficient patients more likely than those needing others’ assistance (p < 0.05). Patients living closer to the clinic (distance up to 50 km) and regularly taking medicines were not more compliant with their scheduled cardiology visits.

Conclusions. There are some factors associated with insufficient cooperation in the continuity of cardiac care in patients after implantation of cardiac support devices. Individual approach to patients who are non-compliant may be helpful in changing individual behaviors, which will result in treatment compliance.

Get Citation

Keywords

cardiac electrotherapy, electrophysiology, cardiac stimulation device, regular visits, compliance

About this article
Title

Continuity of cardiac care in patients after implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices

Journal

Folia Cardiologica

Issue

Vol 13, No 4 (2018)

Pages

298-302

Published online

2018-09-12

DOI

10.5603/FC.2018.0067

Bibliographic record

Folia Cardiologica 2018;13(4):298-302.

Keywords

cardiac electrotherapy
electrophysiology
cardiac stimulation device
regular visits
compliance

Authors

Marcin Paweł Madziarski
Maciej Ornat
Marta Idzior
Agnieszka Kania
Tomasz Bańkowski
Marta Negrusz-Kawecka

References (12)
  1. Przeszłość Demograficzna Polski. .
  2. Miklis P, Uczkiewicz J. Raport Najwyższej Izby Kontroli 2016. Realizacja świadczeń zdrowotnych z zakresu kardiologii przez publiczne i niepubliczne podmioty lecznicze. Informacja o wynikach kontroli. LKA-4101-039/2014 Nr ewid 1/2016/P/14078/LKA Warszawa. ; 2016: 11–15.
  3. Kowalski O. Polskie Towarzystwo Kardiologiczne. Sekcja Rytmu Serca. Biała księga elektroterapii w Polsce. ; 2016: 2–7.
  4. Hess PL, Mi X, Curtis LH, et al. Follow-up of patients with new cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: is adherence to the experts' recommendations associated with improved outcomes? Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10(8): 1127–1133.
  5. Laksman ZWM, Krahn AD, Dorian P, et al. Greater mortality risk among patients with delayed follow-up after implantable cardioverter defibrillator procedures. Can J Cardiol. 2014; 30(6): 598–605.
  6. Al-Khatib SM, Mi X, Wilkoff BL, et al. Follow-up of patients with new cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: are experts' recommendations implemented in routine clinical practice? Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2013; 6(1): 108–116.
  7. Marinskis G, van Erven L, Bongiorni MG, et al. Scientific Initiative Committee, European Heart Rhythm Association. Practices of cardiac implantable electronic device follow-up: results of the European Heart Rhythm Association survey. Europace. 2012; 14(3): 423–425.
  8. van Eck JWM, van Hemel NM, de Voogt WG, et al. FOLLOWPACE investigators. Routine follow-up after pacemaker implantation: frequency, pacemaker programming and professionals in charge. Europace. 2008; 10(7): 832–837.
  9. Varma N, Epstein AE, Irimpen A, et al. TRUST Investigators. Efficacy and safety of automatic remote monitoring for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator follow-up: the Lumos-T Safely Reduces Routine Office Device Follow-up (TRUST) trial. Circulation. 2010; 122(4): 325–332.
  10. Mabo P, Victor F, Bazin P, et al. COMPAS Trial Investigators. A randomized trial of long-term remote monitoring of pacemaker recipients (the COMPAS trial). Eur Heart J. 2012; 33(9): 1105–1111.
  11. Ricci RP, Vicentini A, D'Onofrio A, et al. Impact of in-clinic follow-up visits in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: demographic and socioeconomic analysis of the TARIFF study population. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2013; 38(2): 101–106.
  12. Gramegna L, Tomasi C, Gasparini G, et al. In-hospital follow-up of implantable cardioverter defibrillator and pacemaker carriers: patients' inconvenience and points of view. A four-hospital Italian survey. Europace. 2012; 14(3): 345–350.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

 

Wydawcą serwisu jest  "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl