ArticleCureus2024
Understanding Phantom Shocks in Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Recipients.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Phantom shocks in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) recipients create a complex nexus between cardiac treatment and psychological distress. These sensations, mimicking therapeutic shocks without device activation, deeply affect patients' functionality and well-being. Heightened anxiety, depression, and hopelessness predispose individuals to these occurrences, posing significant challenges. This article delves into the intricate nature of phantom shocks, highlighting subtle clinical cues to differentiate them from genuine therapy shocks. Through a case study of a 75-year-old male with recurrent ICD shocks, diagnosed eventually with phantom shocks, the interplay between psychological distress and physical sensations is underscored. Urgent intervention to address the patient's anxiety and depression using psychotherapy and antidepressants became imperative. The case underscores the immense psychological toll of phantom shocks, exacerbating fear, hopelessness, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Despite treatment attempts, their impact persisted, leading to a shift to comfort-focused care. While research identifies factors such as education levels and prior therapy, predicting and managing phantom shocks remains challenging. This article stresses the need for clinician vigilance, urging proactive identification and tailored interventions to mitigate the profound effects of phantom shocks. The current research landscape lacks comprehensive strategies, necessitating further exploration and targeted therapies to restore patient well-being. In conclusion, comprehensive understanding and specialized care for phantom shocks in ICD recipients, addressing both cardiac and psychological aspects, are imperative. Early recognition and tailored interventions offer promise in alleviating their adverse effects, reinstating patient control, and improving their quality of life.
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.