Goldstein Nathan E, Mehta Davendra, Siddiqui Saima, Teitelbaum Ezra, Zeidman Jessica, Singson Magdelena, Pe Elena, Bradley Elizabeth H, Morrison R Sean
Department of Geriatrics, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Box 1070, One Gustave Levy Place, New York, NY 10029, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Jan;23 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):7-12. doi: 10.1007/s11606-007-0239-8.
To understand potential patient barriers to discussions about implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) deactivation in patients with advanced illness.
Qualitative focus groups.
Fifteen community-dwelling, ambulatory patients with ICDs assigned to focus groups based on duration of time since implantation and whether they had ever received a shock from their device.
A physician and a social worker used a predetermined discussion guide to moderate the groups, and each session was audiotaped and subsequently transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using the method of constant comparison.
No participant had ever discussed deactivation with their physician nor knew that deactivation was an option. Patients expressed a great deal of anxiety about receiving shocks from their device. Participants discussed why they needed the device and expressed desire for more information about the device; however, they would not engage in conversations about deactivating the ICD. One patient described deactivation "like an act of suicide" and all patients believed that the device was exclusively beneficial. Patients also expressed a desire to have their physician make the decision about deactivation.
None of the patients in our study knew that they might need to deactivate their ICD as their health worsens. These community-dwelling outpatients were not willing to discuss the issue of ICD deactivation and their attitudes about deactivation might impede patients from engaging in these conversations. These findings are in contrast to findings in other advance care planning research and may be related to the unique nature of the ICD.
了解晚期疾病患者在讨论植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)停用方面可能存在的患者障碍。
定性焦点小组。
15名居住在社区的门诊ICD患者,根据植入后的时间长短以及是否曾接受过设备电击被分配到焦点小组。
一名医生和一名社会工作者使用预先确定的讨论指南主持小组讨论,每次会议都进行录音并随后转录。使用持续比较法对转录本进行分析。
没有参与者曾与他们的医生讨论过停用问题,也不知道停用是一种选择。患者对接受设备电击表达了极大的焦虑。参与者讨论了他们为什么需要该设备,并表示希望获得更多关于该设备的信息;然而,他们不会参与关于停用ICD的对话。一名患者将停用描述为“类似自杀行为”,所有患者都认为该设备完全有益。患者还表示希望由他们的医生做出停用的决定。
我们研究中的患者都不知道随着健康状况恶化他们可能需要停用ICD。这些居住在社区的门诊患者不愿意讨论ICD停用问题,他们对停用的态度可能会阻碍患者参与这些对话。这些发现与其他临终关怀规划研究的结果形成对比,可能与ICD的独特性质有关。