Literature DB >> 23250540

Incorporating the patient perspective: a critical review of clinical practice guidelines for implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy.

Kerry E Joyce1, Stephen Lord, Daniel D Matlock, Janet M McComb, Richard Thomson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are recommended for patients with heart failure and/or ventricular arrhythmias at risk of sudden cardiac death. Guidelines for ICD implantation are derived from robust clinical data. However, critical factors which might influence treatment decisions include patient preferences. We set out to determine how clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) incorporate the patient perspective into supporting decision making about ICDs.
METHODS: CPGs on ICD implantation were purposively selected from national and professional bodies in Europe, North America and Australasia. CPGs were then appraised according to three key domains of shared decision making: (a) informing patients about the risks, benefits and consequences known to be important to patients; (b) personalising risks and benefits and (c) involvement of patient (plus family/significant others if desired) in decision making.
RESULTS: Appraisal of six current CPGs found major deficiencies or inconsistencies in guidance. CPGs tended to focus on evidence of device effectiveness, with sparse consideration of other outcomes important to patients such as impacts on quality of life and psychosocial well-being. Little reference was made to involvement of the patient in decision making.
CONCLUSIONS: This suggests that embedding shared decision in CPGs will improve the patient-centeredness of ICD treatment by enabling patients to make informed, value-based decisions. Specific recommendations for CPG development include the need for signposting to preference sensitive decision points as well as inclusion of a broader range of outcomes which are known to be important to patients when deciding whether or not to have a device fitted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23250540     DOI: 10.1007/s10840-012-9762-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1383-875X            Impact factor:   1.900


  50 in total

Review 1.  Framework for teaching and learning informed shared decision making.

Authors:  A Towle; W Godolphin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

Review 2.  Quality of life and psychological functioning of icd patients.

Authors:  Samuel F Sears; Jamie B Conti
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 5.994

3.  Risk communication in practice: the contribution of decision aids.

Authors:  Annette M O'Connor; France Légaré; Dawn Stacey
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-27

4.  President's page: employing shared decision-making models to improve care and patient value: a cardiovascular professional initiative.

Authors:  Ralph Brindis; John A Spertus
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-12-07       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  An updated review of implantable cardioverter/defibrillators, induced anxiety, and quality of life.

Authors:  J Michael Bostwick; Christopher L Sola
Journal:  Heart Fail Clin       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.179

Review 6.  Posttraumatic stress and the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patient: what the electrophysiologist needs to know.

Authors:  Samuel F Sears; Jessica D Hauf; Kari Kirian; Garrett Hazelton; Jamie B Conti
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2011-04

Review 7.  Partnerships with patients: the pros and cons of shared clinical decision-making.

Authors:  A Coulter
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  1997-04

8.  Clinical practice guidelines and patient decision aids. An inevitable relationship.

Authors:  Trudy van der Weijden; Antoine Boivin; Jako Burgers; Holger J Schünemann; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Psychopathology in postinfarction patients implanted with cardioverter-defibrillators for secondary prevention. A cross-sectional, case-controlled study.

Authors:  Anthony P Redhead; Douglas Turkington; Sanjay Rao; Margaret M Tynan; John P Bourke
Journal:  J Psychosom Res       Date:  2010-08-10       Impact factor: 3.006

10.  How to integrate individual patient values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines? A research protocol.

Authors:  Trudy van der Weijden; France Légaré; Antoine Boivin; Jako S Burgers; Haske van Veenendaal; Anne M Stiggelbout; Marjan Faber; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2010-02-02       Impact factor: 7.327

View more
  6 in total

1.  Communicating risk using absolute risk reduction or prolongation of life formats: cluster-randomised trial in general practice.

Authors:  Charlotte Gry Harmsen; Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen; Pia Veldt Larsen; Jørgen Nexøe; Henrik Støvring; Dorte Gyrd-Hansen; Jesper Bo Nielsen; Adrian Edwards; Dorte Ejg Jarbøl
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Introduction: health policy II. A new era of heath policy in electrophysiology and cardiology.

Authors:  Fred Kusumoto
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 3.  Patient-reported outcomes in heart failure: existing measures and future uses.

Authors:  Lauren E Thompson; David B Bekelman; Larry A Allen; Pamela N Peterson
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2015-06

Review 4.  The gap between policy and practice: a systematic review of patient-centred care interventions in chronic heart failure.

Authors:  P M Kane; F E M Murtagh; K Ryan; N G Mahon; B McAdam; R McQuillan; C Ellis-Smith; C Tracey; C Howley; C Raleigh; G O'Gara; I J Higginson; B A Daveson
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.214

5.  How do guideline developers identify, incorporate and report patient preferences? An international cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Jayden Blackwood; Melissa J Armstrong; Corinna Schaefer; Ian D Graham; Loes Knaapen; Sharon E Straus; Robin Urquhart; Anna R Gagliardi
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-05-24       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 6.  How to identify, incorporate and report patient preferences in clinical guidelines: A scoping review.

Authors:  Claire Kim; Melissa J Armstrong; Whitney B Berta; Anna R Gagliardi
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2020-07-12       Impact factor: 3.377

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.