Department of Biobehavioral Nursing and Health Informatics, University of Washington School of Nursing, Seattle, Washington.
Psychosocial and Community Health, University of Washington School of Nursing, Seattle, Washington.
Heart Rhythm. 2019 Mar;16(3):453-459. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2018.10.011. Epub 2018 Oct 16.
Interventions to improve physical and psychological outcomes in recipients with an initial implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and their intimate partners are largely unstudied, though likely to have a major impact on adjustment to the ICD and general well-being.
The purpose of this study was to report the primary outcomes of the patient plus partner randomized controlled trial.
In a 2-group (N = 301) prospective randomized controlled trial, we compared 2 social-cognitive-based intervention programs-patient plus partner (P+P) and patient only (P only)-implemented after initial ICD implantation. The patient intervention, consisting of educational materials, nurse-delivered telephone coaching, videotape demonstrations, and access to a nurse via a 24/7 pager, was implemented in both groups. P+P also incorporated partner participation. The primary patient outcomes were symptoms and anxiety at 3 months. Other outcomes were physical function (SF-36 [Short Form 36] and ICD shocks-patient), psychological adjustment (PHQ-9 [Patient Health Questionaire-9]), relationship impact (Dyadic Adjustment Scale and Oberst Caregiving Burden Scale (DAS and OCBS) partner), self-efficacy and knowledge (Sudden Cardiac Arrest-Self Efficacy [SCA-SE], Sudden Cardiac Arrest-Outcomes Expectation [SCA-OE], and Knowledge Self-Assessment [KSA]), and health care utilization (outpatient visits and hospitalizations) at hospital discharge and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-ICD implantation.
For patients, P+P compared with P only was more effective in improving symptoms (P = .02), depression (P = .006), self-efficacy (P = .02), outcome expectations (P = .03), and knowledge (P = .07). For partners, P+P was more effective in improving partner caregiver burden (P = .002), self-efficacy (P = .001), and ICD knowledge (P = .04).
An intervention that integrated the partner into the patient's recovery after an ICD improved outcomes for both. Beyond survival benefits of the ICD, intervention programs designed to address both the patient and their partner living successfully with an ICD are needed and promising.
对于初始植入式心脏复律除颤器 (ICD) 的接受者及其亲密伴侣,改善身体和心理结果的干预措施在很大程度上尚未得到研究,尽管这可能对 ICD 的适应和整体幸福感产生重大影响。
本研究旨在报告患者加伴侣随机对照试验的主要结果。
在一项 2 组(N = 301)前瞻性随机对照试验中,我们比较了 2 种基于社会认知的干预方案-患者加伴侣 (P+P) 和仅患者 (P 仅)-在初始 ICD 植入后实施。患者干预包括教育材料、护士提供的电话辅导、录像演示以及通过 24/7 寻呼机与护士联系,在两组中均实施。P+P 还纳入了伴侣参与。主要患者结局是 3 个月时的症状和焦虑。其他结局是身体功能(SF-36 [简短形式 36] 和 ICD 电击-患者)、心理调整(PHQ-9 [患者健康问卷-9])、关系影响(对偶调整量表和 Oberst 护理负担量表 (DAS 和 OCBS) 伴侣)、自我效能和知识(心搏骤停自我效能量表 [SCA-SE]、心搏骤停结果预期量表 [SCA-OE] 和知识自我评估量表 [KSA])以及 ICD 植入后出院时和 1、3、6 和 12 个月的医疗保健利用(门诊就诊和住院)。
对于患者,与 P 仅相比,P+P 更有效地改善了症状(P =.02)、抑郁(P =.006)、自我效能(P =.02)、结果预期(P =.03)和知识(P =.07)。对于伴侣,P+P 更有效地改善了伴侣照顾者负担(P =.002)、自我效能(P =.001)和 ICD 知识(P =.04)。
将伴侣纳入 ICD 后患者康复的干预措施改善了两者的结果。除了 ICD 的生存益处外,还需要并有望设计旨在解决患者及其伴侣成功适应 ICD 的干预计划。