Loreena Hill1, Sonja McIlfatrick2, Brian Taylor3, Lana Dixon4, Mark Harbinson4, Donna Fitzsimons5. 1. Institute of Nursing Research, University of Ulster, Jordanstown Campus, Newtownabbey, UK Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK Hill-L3@email.ulster.ac.uk. 2. Institute of Nursing Research, University of Ulster, Jordanstown Campus, Newtownabbey, UK All Ireland Institute of Hospice & Palliative Care, Dublin, Ireland. 3. Institute of Nursing Research, University of Ulster, Jordanstown Campus, Newtownabbey, UK. 4. Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK. 5. Institute of Nursing Research, University of Ulster, Jordanstown Campus, Newtownabbey, UK Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK All Ireland Institute of Hospice & Palliative Care, Dublin, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individualised care at the end of life requires professional understanding of the patient's perception of implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation. AIM: The aim was to evaluate the evidence on patients' perception of implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation at end of life. DESIGN: Systematic narrative review of empirical studies was published during 2008-2014. DATA SOURCES: Data were collected from six databases, citations from relevant articles and expert recommendations. RESULTS: In all, 18 studies included with collective population of n = 5810. Concept mapping highlighted three themes: (1) Diverse preferences regarding discussion and deactivation. Deactivation was rarely discussed pre-implantation, with some studies demonstrating patients' reluctance to discuss implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation at any stage. Two studies found the majority of patients valued such discussions. Diversity was reflected in patients' willingness to deactivate, ranging from 12% (n = 9) in Irish cohort to 79% (n = 195) in Dutch study. (2) Ethical and legal considerations were predominant in Canadian and American literature as patients wanted to contribute but felt the decision should be a doctor's responsibility. Advance directives were uncommon in Europe, and where they existed the implantable cardioverter defibrillator was not mentioned. (3) 'Living in the now' was evident as despite deteriorating symptoms many patients maintained a positive outlook and anticipated surviving more than 10 years. Several studies asserted living longer was more important than quality of life. CONCLUSION: Patients regard the implantable cardioverter defibrillator as a complex and solely beneficial device, with little insight regarding its potential impact on a peaceful death. This review confirms the need for professionals to discuss with patients and families implantable cardioverter defibrillator functionality and deactivation at appropriate opportunities.
BACKGROUND: Individualised care at the end of life requires professional understanding of the patient's perception of implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation. AIM: The aim was to evaluate the evidence on patients' perception of implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation at end of life. DESIGN: Systematic narrative review of empirical studies was published during 2008-2014. DATA SOURCES: Data were collected from six databases, citations from relevant articles and expert recommendations. RESULTS: In all, 18 studies included with collective population of n = 5810. Concept mapping highlighted three themes: (1) Diverse preferences regarding discussion and deactivation. Deactivation was rarely discussed pre-implantation, with some studies demonstrating patients' reluctance to discuss implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation at any stage. Two studies found the majority of patients valued such discussions. Diversity was reflected in patients' willingness to deactivate, ranging from 12% (n = 9) in Irish cohort to 79% (n = 195) in Dutch study. (2) Ethical and legal considerations were predominant in Canadian and American literature as patients wanted to contribute but felt the decision should be a doctor's responsibility. Advance directives were uncommon in Europe, and where they existed the implantable cardioverter defibrillator was not mentioned. (3) 'Living in the now' was evident as despite deteriorating symptoms many patients maintained a positive outlook and anticipated surviving more than 10 years. Several studies asserted living longer was more important than quality of life. CONCLUSION:Patients regard the implantable cardioverter defibrillator as a complex and solely beneficial device, with little insight regarding its potential impact on a peaceful death. This review confirms the need for professionals to discuss with patients and families implantable cardioverter defibrillator functionality and deactivation at appropriate opportunities.
Authors: Lisa Hjelmfors; Jan Mårtensson; Anna Strömberg; Anna Sandgren; Maria Friedrichsen; Tiny Jaarsma Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-15 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Samantha M McEvedy; Jan Cameron; Eugene Lugg; Jennifer Miller; Chris Haedtke; Muna Hammash; Martha J Biddle; Kyoung Suk Lee; Justin A Mariani; Chantal F Ski; David R Thompson; Misook Lee Chung; Debra K Moser Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2017-07-05 Impact factor: 4.762
Authors: Kevser Gülcihan Balci; Mustafa Mücahit Balci; Mehmet Kadri Akboğa; Fatih Sen; Burak Açar; Samet Yılmaz; Emek Ediboğlu; Orhan Maden; Hatice Selcuk; Mehmet Timur Selcuk; Ahmet Temizhan; Sinan Aydoğdu Journal: Cardiol Ther Date: 2015-09-14
Authors: Holly Standing; Richard G Thomson; Darren Flynn; Julian Hughes; Kerry Joyce; Trudie Lobban; Stephen Lord; Dan D Matlock; Janet M McComb; Paul Paes; Chris Wilkinson; Catherine Exley Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-06 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Loreena Hill; Sonja McIlfatrick; Brian J Taylor; Tiny Jaarsma; Debra Moser; Paul Slater; Toni McAloon; Lana Dixon; Patrick Donnelly; Anna Stromberg; Donna Fitzsimons Journal: J Cardiovasc Nurs Date: 2018 Nov/Dec Impact factor: 2.083
Authors: Lisa Hjelmfors; Martje H L van der Wal; Maria Friedrichsen; Anna Milberg; Jan Mårtensson; Anna Sandgren; Anna Strömberg; Tiny Jaarsma Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 3.234