Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23217431›Full record

ReviewProgress in cardiovascular diseases

Life-saving devices reach the end of life with heart failure.

Daniel D Matlock, Lynne Warner Stevenson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Progress in cardiovascular diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Daniel D MatlockUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO 80045, USA. Daniel.matlock@ucdenver.edu
Lynne Warner Stevenson

Funding

Implanted Defibrillators and Older Adults: A Model of Decisions and TechnologiesK23AG040696 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI MATLOCK, DANIEL D · 2011 to 2015
$716k
NHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100025CNIA NIH HHS K23 AG040696NIA NIH HHS K23AG040696
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The new millennium has seen a dramatic increase in use of potentially life-prolonging devices such as implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and ventricular assist devices (VADs) among patients with advanced heart failure. Most patients who receive these devices will have them in place when they die. Clinicians who care for these patients must commit through the entire course of therapy, including the end-of-life. Discussions about device deactivation should be the standard of care and this discussion should take place prior to implantation, during annual heart failure reviews, after major milestones, and when the end-of-life appears to be approaching. Turning off ICDs and turning off VADs in response to patient or proxy requests are legally the same although they may be perceived differently, as disconnection of the VAD is more likely to cause immediate death. This article discusses the evidence around device deactivation at the end-of-life and offers suggestions for improvement.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAttitude to HealthDefibrillators, ImplantableHeart-Assist DevicesHeart FailureHumansTerminal Care

Identifiers

PMID23217431
PMCPMC3523274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.