Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32548800›Full record

ReviewNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2020

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators at the end of life: future perspectives on clinical practice.

R Stoevelaar, A Brinkman-Stoppelenburg, R L van Bruchem-Visser, A G van Driel, R E Bhagwandien, D A M J Theuns, J A C Rietjens, A van der Heide

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine and Indian Association of Palliative Care Expert Consensus and Position Statements for End-of-life and Palliative Care in the Intensive Care Unit.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

R StoevelaarDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. r.stoevelaar@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5101-5654
A Brinkman-StoppelenburgDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
R L van Bruchem-VisserDepartment of Internal Medicine, Erasmus MC, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
A G van DrielDepartment of Cardiology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
R E BhagwandienDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
D A M J TheunsDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J A C RietjensDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
A van der HeideDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLAlbert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is effective in terminating life-threatening arrhythmias. However, in the last phase of life, ICD shocks may no longer be appropriate. Guidelines recommend timely discussion with the patient regarding deactivation of the shock function of the ICD. However, research shows that such conversations are scarce, and some patients experience avoidable and distressful shocks in the final days of life. Barriers such as physicians' lack of time, difficulties in finding the right time to discuss ICD deactivation, patients' reluctance to discuss the topic, and the fragmentation of care, which obscures responsibilities, prevent healthcare professionals from discussing this topic with the patient. In this point-of-view article, we argue that healthcare professionals who are involved in the care for ICD patients should be better educated on how to communicate with patients about ICD deactivation and the end of life. Optimal communication is needed to reduce the number of patients experiencing inappropriate and painful shocks in the terminal stage of their lives.

Indexed as

Advance care planningDecision-makingEnd-of-life careImplantable cardioverter defibrillatorPalliative careWithholding treatment

Identifiers

PMID32548800
PMCPMC7596123
OpenAlexW3034424106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.