Key result
Insertion site infection occurs in ~25% of temporary pacemakers, linked to suboptimal nursing care.
Why the study?
Temporary pacing is essential for managing inadequate cardiac output in critically ill cardiac patients, but factors contributing to related adverse events are not well defined.
Observational (n=90)
Yes
There is a significant correlation between nurses' knowledge and practice deficits and the occurrence of temporary pacemaker adverse events, particularly insertion site infections, highlighting the need for enhanced nursing education and standardized protocols.
Association between nurse knowledge deficits and temporary pacemaker infections supports targeted education; leaves open causal impact pending prospective trials.
AbstractBackground: Temporary pacing is an emergency intervention used to manageinadequate cardiac output resulting from bradycardia. It delivers electrical stimulationto maintain an appropriate heart rhythm until a permanent pacemaker is implanted, orthe underlying condition is corrected, and it is essential for maintaining tissue perfusionin critical care settings. Aim: To determine the factors contributing to temporarypacemaker–related adverse events among critically ill cardiac patients. Setting: Thestudy was conducted in the coronary care units of Alexandria Main University Hospitaland Smouha General Hospital. Subjects: A convenience sample of 60 critically illcardiac patients, aged 18–65 years, who were admitted to the specified units andindicated for temporary pacemaker insertion, was included. In addition, approximately30 nurses providing direct care to these patients in the same settings participated in thestudy. Tools: Three tools were utilized. Tool I was the Cardiac Critically Ill Patient’sTemporary Pacemaker Assessment Record. Tool II was the Nurses’ KnowledgeRegarding Temporary Pacemaker Care Questionnaire. Tool III was the ObservationalChecklist for Coronary Care Nurses’ Practices Regarding Temporary Pacemaker Care.Results: The findings demonstrated that the most common adverse event related totemporary pacemaker was insertion site infection (25%), with a low rate of adverseevents related to the device. A statistically significant positive correlation was identifiedbetween nurses’ unsatisfactory levels of knowledge and practice (p<0.001) and theoccurrence of these adverse events. Conclusion: The study indicated that temporarypacing effectively manages complete heart block by improving hemodynamic stability.However, it also identified risks, including infection and lead dislodgement, associatedwith prolonged use of temporary pacemakers. Recommendations: Early transition topermanent pacemaker implantation, strict adherence to aseptic techniques, appropriatesecurement protocols, and enhanced nursing education are recommended to reducecomplications and improve patient safety and care outcomes. Develop and implementstandardized, evidence-based protocols for the insertion, monitoring, and removal oftemporary pacemakers to minimize practice variation and associated complications
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ghany et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Critically ill cardiac patients indicating temporary pacing (n=90). Temporary pacemaker insertion and nursing care was evaluated on Temporary pacemaker-related adverse events (p=<0.001). The most common temporary pacemaker adverse event was insertion site infection (25%), which was significantly correlated with unsatisfactory nursing knowledge and practice (p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: