ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2015
Psychosocial issues in ventricular assist device implantation and management.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Psychosocial Risk Factors With Quality of Life and Readmissions 1 Year After LVAD Implantation.Journal of cardiac failure · 2025Article
- The History of Durable Left Ventricular Assist Devices and Comparison of Outcomes: HeartWare, HeartMate II, HeartMate 3, and the Future of Mechanical Circulatory Support.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Psychosocial Risk and Its Association With Outcomes in Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients.Circulation. Heart failure · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The primary goal of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is to increase quantity and quality of life (QOL) in patients with systolic heart failure refractory to medical therapies. A key contributor to the success in MCS therapy is a comprehensive assessment of the candidate for device implantation. A crucial element of that assessment is an evaluation of the individual's psychosocial status, recommended by most current MCS guidelines. By focusing on criteria including drug, alcohol and tobacco abuse, ability to learn and problem solve, history of adherence to medical regimens, and adequate psychosocial support following implant, the team has an opportunity to create an individualized post-discharge plan that addresses identified gaps and optimizes the patient's likelihood for success. Information gathered also provides the team with a setting in which to discuss the patient's personal goals for the therapy and advanced care planning. We explore all of these issues and offer recommendations for approaching psychosocial assessment for MCS patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.