In a cross-sectional survey of the Hungarian population aged 40 and older, 30.9% of respondents were currently living with an implantable medical device.
Cross-Sectional (n=1,400)
In a Hungarian cross-sectional survey, 30.9% of adults over 40 lived with an implantable medical device, and shared decision-making was the strongest predictor of the device's positive impact on their lives.
BACKGROUND: Implantable medical devices (IMDs) are medical instruments embedded inside the body. Well-informed and empowered patients living with IMDs are key players of improving IMD-related patient safety and health outcomes. However, little is known about IMD patients' epidemiology, characteristics, and current awareness levels. Our primary aim was to investigate the point and lifetime prevalence of patients living with IMDs. Patients' IMD-related knowledge and determinants of IMDs' impact on their life were also explored. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted. Respondents' IMD history, whether they received instructions for use and IMD's overall impact on life were recorded by self-reports. Patients' knowledge about living with IMDs was assessed on visual analogue scales (VAS, 0-10). Shared decision-making was analyzed by the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Descriptive statistics and subgroup comparisons between IMD wearers were performed for statistical differences. Significant determinants of IMD's overall impact on life were examined in linear regression analysis. RESULTS: In the total sample (N = 1400, mean age 58.1 ±11.1; female 53.7%), nearly one third of respondents were living with IMD (30.9%; 433/1400). Among them, the most frequent IMDs were tooth implants (30.9%) and intraocular lens (26.8%). Mean knowledge VAS scores were similar (range: 5.5 ±3.8-6.5 ±3.2) but differences by IMD types were observed. Patients who received instructions for use or reported better impact on life indicated higher self-reported knowledge. Regression confirmed that patients' knowledge was significant predictor of IMD's impact on life, but this effect was overwritten by the SDM-Q-9. CONCLUSIONS: This first comprehensive epidemiological study on IMDs provides basic data for public health strategy planning alongside the implementation of MDR. Improved self-perceived outcomes were associated with higher knowledge hence education of patients receiving IMD deserves consideration. We suggest to investigate further the role of shared decision-making on IMD's overall impact on patients' life in future prospective studies.
Hölgyesi et al. (Tue,) conducted a cross-sectional in General population (n=1,400). Implantable medical devices (IMDs) was evaluated on Point prevalence of patients living with IMDs. In a cross-sectional survey of the Hungarian population aged 40 and older, 30.9% of respondents were currently living with an implantable medical device.