Key result
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients with implantable defibrillators reported good spirit and hope, adapting to limitations over time and accepting the device as a life-saving part of their body.
Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and ICDs generally adapt well and view their devices positively as a source of safety, despite disease-related limitations and occasional inappropriate shocks.
BACKGROUND: ICDs efficiently terminate life-threatening arrhythmias, but complications occur during long-term follow-up. Patients' own perspective is largely unknown. The aim of the study was to describe experiences of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) patients with implantable defibrillators (ICDs). METHODS: We analyzed 26 Swedish patient interviews using hermeneutics and latent content analysis. RESULTS: Patients (aged 27-76 years) were limited by HCM especially if it deteriorates into heart failure. The ICD implies safety, gratitude, and is accepted as a part of the body even when inappropriate ICD shocks are encountered. Nobody regretted the implant. Both the disease and the ICD affected professional life and leisure time activities, especially at younger ages. Family support was usually strong, but sometimes resulted in overprotection, whereas health care focused on medical issues. Despite limitations, patients adapted, accepted, and managed challenges. CONCLUSION: HCM patients with ICDs reported good spirit and hope even though they had to adapt and accept limitations over time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Magnusson et al. (2017) studied Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) (n=26). Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) was evaluated on Patient experiences and perspectives (qualitative themes). Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients with implantable defibrillators reported good spirit and hope, adapting to limitations over time and accepting the device as a life-saving part of their body.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: