Suppr超能文献

用于预防心脏性猝死的可穿戴式心脏复律除颤器:一项卫生技术评估及患者焦点小组研究

Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study.

作者信息

Ettinger Sabine, Stanak Michal, Szymański Piotr, Wild Claudia, Tandara Haček Romana, Erčević Darija, Grenković Renata, Huić Mirjana

机构信息

Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Health Technology Assessment, Vienna, Austria.

Institute of Cardiology, Warsaw, Poland.

出版信息

Med Devices (Auckl). 2017 Nov 14;10:257-271. doi: 10.2147/MDER.S144048. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

AIM

To summarize the evidence on clinical effectiveness and safety of wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) therapy for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac arrest in patients at risk.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in databases including MEDLINE via OVID, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and CRD (DARE, NHS-EED, HTA). The evidence obtained was summarized according to GRADE methodology. A health technology assessment (HTA) was conducted using the HTA Core Model for rapid relative effectiveness assessment. Primary outcomes for the clinical effectiveness domain were all-cause and disease-specific mortality. Outcomes for the safety domain were adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). A focus group with cardiac disease patients was conducted to evaluate ethical, organizational, patient, social, and legal aspects of the WCD use.

RESULTS

No randomized- or non-randomized controlled trials were identified. Non-comparative studies (n=5) reported AEs including skin rash/itching (6%), false alarms (14%), and palpitations/light-headedness/fainting (9%) and discontinuation due to comfort/lifestyle issues (16-22%), and SAEs including inappropriate shocks (0-2%), unsuccessful shocks (0-0.7%), and death (0-0.3%). The focus group results reported that experiencing a sense of security is crucial to patients and that the WCD is not considered an option for weeks or even months due to expected restrictions in living a "normal" life.

CONCLUSION

The WCD appears to be relatively safe for short-to-medium term, but the quality of existing evidence is very low. AEs and SAEs need to be more appropriately reported in order to further evaluate the safety of the device. High-quality comparative evidence and well-described disease groups are required to assess the effectiveness of the WCD and to determine which patient groups may benefit most from the intervention.

摘要

目的

总结可穿戴式心脏复律除颤器(WCD)疗法用于有风险患者心脏骤停一级和二级预防的临床有效性及安全性证据。

方法

我们在多个数据库中进行了系统的文献检索,包括通过OVID检索的MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane图书馆以及CRD(DARE、NHS-EED、HTA)。根据GRADE方法对所得证据进行总结。使用HTA核心模型进行卫生技术评估(HTA)以进行快速相对有效性评估。临床有效性领域的主要结局为全因死亡率和疾病特异性死亡率。安全性领域的结局为不良事件(AE)和严重不良事件(SAE)。开展了一个针对心脏病患者的焦点小组,以评估使用WCD的伦理、组织、患者、社会和法律方面。

结果

未检索到随机或非随机对照试验。非对照研究(n = 5)报告的不良事件包括皮疹/瘙痒(6%)、误报(14%)、心悸/头晕/昏厥(9%)以及因舒适度/生活方式问题导致的停用(16 - 22%),严重不良事件包括不适当电击(0 - 2%)、电击未成功(0 - 0.7%)以及死亡(0 - 0.3%)。焦点小组结果报告称,安全感对患者至关重要,并且由于预期的“正常”生活受限,在数周甚至数月内WCD都不被视为一种选择。

结论

WCD在短期至中期似乎相对安全,但现有证据质量非常低。需要更恰当地报告不良事件和严重不良事件,以便进一步评估该设备的安全性。需要高质量的比较证据和详细描述的疾病组来评估WCD的有效性,并确定哪些患者组可能从该干预措施中获益最大。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/927d/5697444/1dbbe7ba372f/mder-10-257Fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验