Key result
Having had an ICD shock (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.64-2.56), high anxiety, and high ICD concerns were significant predictors of having end-of-life discussions with providers, whereas heart failure was not.
Why the study?
Decisions about end-of-life care and shared decision-making are recommended before and after ICD implantation, but experiences and attitudes in ICD recipients with and without heart failure are not well described.
What are the experiences, attitudes, and knowledge regarding end-of-life care among ICD patients, and does heart failure status affect these factors?
Observational (n=2,403)
Yes
What are the experiences, attitudes, and knowledge regarding end-of-life care among ICD patients, and does heart failure status affect these factors?
Despite guideline recommendations, 40% of ICD patients do not want to discuss end-of-life scenarios, and having heart failure does not predict engagement in these discussions, whereas experiencing an ICD shock or high anxiety does.
ICD shock or anxiety may drive end-of-life discussions more than heart failure; hypothesis-generating associations require prospective validation before guiding practice.
Background: Authors of expert guidelines and consensus statements recommend that decisions at the end-of-life (EOL) be discussed before and after implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and include promotion of shared decision-making. The purpose of this study was to describe experiences, attitudes, and knowledge about the ICD at EOL in ICD recipients and to compare experiences, attitudes, and knowledge in ICD recipients with and without heart failure (HF). We further sought to determine factors associated with having discussions about EOL. Methods and Results: Using a national registry in Sweden of all ICD recipients (n=5355) in 2012, an EOL questionnaire, along with other ICD-related measures, was completed by 2403 ICD recipients. Of the participants, 1275 (n=53%) had HF. Their responses in the knowledge, experience, and attitude domains were almost identical to those without HF. Forty percent of patients with and without HF did not want to discuss their illness trajectory or deactivation of their ICD ever. In logistic regression analyses, we found that having had an ICD shock (OR, 2.05; CI, 1.64–2.56), having high levels of anxiety (OR, 1.41; CI, 1.04–1.92), and having high levels of ICD concerns (OR, 1.53; CI, 1.22–1.92) were the only significant predictors of having discussions with providers about EOL scenarios ( P <0.001 for full model). Conclusions: HF was not a predictor of having an EOL conversation. Further research is needed to determine if attitudes related to not wanting to discuss EOL interfere with good quality of life and of death, or if shared decision-making should be encouraged in these individuals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thompson et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recipients (n=2,403). ICD shock vs. No ICD shock was evaluated on Having discussions with providers about EOL scenarios (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.64-2.56, p=<0.001). Having had an ICD shock (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.64-2.56), high anxiety, and high ICD concerns were significant predictors of having end-of-life discussions with providers, whereas heart failure was not.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: