ArticlePacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE2019
Healthcare utilization in patients with first-time implantable cardioverter defibrillators (data from the WEBCARE study).
Article in Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Healthcare utilization in patients with first-time implantable cardioverter defibrillators (data from the WEBCARE study).Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundKnowledge of the level of healthcare utilization (HCU) and the predictors of high HCU use in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is lacking. We examined the level of HCU and predictors associated with increased HCU in first-time ICD patients, using a prospective study design.
methodsICD patients (N = 201) completed a set of questionnaires at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months after inclusion. A hierarchical multiple linear regression with three models was performed to examine predictors of HCU.
resultsHCU was highest between baseline and 3 months postimplantation and gradually decreased during 12 months follow-up. During the first year postimplantation, only depression (β = 0.342, P = 0.002) was a significant predictor. Between baseline and 3 months follow-up, younger age (β = -0.220, P < 0.01), New York Heart Association class III/IV (β = 0.705, P = 0.01), and secondary indication (β = 0.148, P = 0.05) were independent predictors for increased HCU. Between 3 and 6 months follow-up, younger age (β = -0.151, P = 0.05) and depression (β = 0.370, P < 0.001) predicted increased HCU. Between 6 and 12 months only depression (β = 0.355, P = 0.001) remained a significant predictor.
conclusionsDepression was an important predictor of increased HCU in ICD patients in the first year postimplantation, particularly after 3 months postimplantation. Identifying patients who need additional care and provide this on time might better meet patients' needs and lower future HCU.
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.