心脏病专家对终止起搏器治疗的看法--德国心脏病专家匿名调查。

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Clinical Research in Cardiology Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI:10.1007/s00392-024-02525-z
Irene Portig, Elena Hofacker, Philipp Sommer, Christian Volberg, Carola Seifart
{"title":"心脏病专家对终止起搏器治疗的看法--德国心脏病专家匿名调查。","authors":"Irene Portig, Elena Hofacker, Philipp Sommer, Christian Volberg, Carola Seifart","doi":"10.1007/s00392-024-02525-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The patient's right to refuse pacemaker therapy is mentioned in the relevant European consensus statement but additional information is only available on deactivation of implantable cardioverter deactivator and not on other cardiac implantable electronic devices such as pacemakers. Therefore, we were interested in opinions, concerns and attitudes of cardiologists, who are the primary contact persons for such requests, since the number of patients asking for withdrawal of pacemaker therapy is likely to increase leaving cardiologists and healthcare professionals with a difficult medical but also ethical problem.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous questionnaire was sent to all German cardiology departments (N = 288).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>48% of cardiology departments responded by sending back 247 completed questionnaires. Most participating cardiologists were experienced when considering the duration of their professional activity. Almost all of the respondents regularly perform check-ups of pacemakers. The majority of cardiologists answering our questionnaire were prepared to deactivate a pacemaker upon patients' request, and have done so. In pacemaker dependency, however, the willingness to withdraw decreases, even if death is imminent, for fear of causing distressing symptoms, sense of being responsible for patients possible immediate death, or fear of legal consequences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The survey could clearly show that uncertainties remain among cardiologists dealing with a patient's wish for withdrawal, especially in cases of pacemaker dependency. We suggest that official statements of cardiologic societies in Europe are issued to clarify ethical, legal and practical aspects of pacemaker withdrawal.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00026168) on 30.08.2021.</p>","PeriodicalId":10474,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research in Cardiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cardiologists' perspective on termination of pacemaker therapy-an anonymous survey among cardiologists in Germany.\",\"authors\":\"Irene Portig, Elena Hofacker, Philipp Sommer, Christian Volberg, Carola Seifart\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00392-024-02525-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The patient's right to refuse pacemaker therapy is mentioned in the relevant European consensus statement but additional information is only available on deactivation of implantable cardioverter deactivator and not on other cardiac implantable electronic devices such as pacemakers. Therefore, we were interested in opinions, concerns and attitudes of cardiologists, who are the primary contact persons for such requests, since the number of patients asking for withdrawal of pacemaker therapy is likely to increase leaving cardiologists and healthcare professionals with a difficult medical but also ethical problem.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous questionnaire was sent to all German cardiology departments (N = 288).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>48% of cardiology departments responded by sending back 247 completed questionnaires. Most participating cardiologists were experienced when considering the duration of their professional activity. Almost all of the respondents regularly perform check-ups of pacemakers. The majority of cardiologists answering our questionnaire were prepared to deactivate a pacemaker upon patients' request, and have done so. In pacemaker dependency, however, the willingness to withdraw decreases, even if death is imminent, for fear of causing distressing symptoms, sense of being responsible for patients possible immediate death, or fear of legal consequences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The survey could clearly show that uncertainties remain among cardiologists dealing with a patient's wish for withdrawal, especially in cases of pacemaker dependency. We suggest that official statements of cardiologic societies in Europe are issued to clarify ethical, legal and practical aspects of pacemaker withdrawal.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00026168) on 30.08.2021.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10474,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Research in Cardiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Research in Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-024-02525-z\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Research in Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-024-02525-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:相关的欧洲共识声明中提到了患者拒绝起搏器治疗的权利,但只有关于停用植入式心律转复除颤器的补充信息,而没有关于起搏器等其他心脏植入式电子设备的补充信息。因此,我们有兴趣了解作为此类请求主要联系人的心脏病专家的意见、担忧和态度,因为要求停用起搏器治疗的患者人数可能会增加,这给心脏病专家和医护人员带来了棘手的医疗和伦理问题:方法:向德国所有心脏科部门(288 人)发送匿名调查问卷:结果:48%的心脏病科回复了 247 份完整问卷。从职业活动的持续时间来看,大多数参与调查的心脏病专家都经验丰富。几乎所有受访者都定期对心脏起搏器进行检查。大多数回答问卷的心脏病专家都准备好应患者的要求停用心脏起搏器,并且已经这样做了。然而,在起搏器依赖症患者中,即使死亡迫在眉睫,也会因为害怕引起不适症状、对患者可能立即死亡负有责任或担心法律后果而降低撤除起搏器的意愿:调查清楚地表明,心脏病专家在处理病人的撤机意愿时仍存在不确定性,尤其是在起搏器依赖的情况下。我们建议欧洲心脏病学会发布官方声明,明确起搏器撤除的伦理、法律和实际问题:已于 2021 年 8 月 30 日在德国临床试验注册中心注册(DRKS00026168)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cardiologists' perspective on termination of pacemaker therapy-an anonymous survey among cardiologists in Germany.

Background: The patient's right to refuse pacemaker therapy is mentioned in the relevant European consensus statement but additional information is only available on deactivation of implantable cardioverter deactivator and not on other cardiac implantable electronic devices such as pacemakers. Therefore, we were interested in opinions, concerns and attitudes of cardiologists, who are the primary contact persons for such requests, since the number of patients asking for withdrawal of pacemaker therapy is likely to increase leaving cardiologists and healthcare professionals with a difficult medical but also ethical problem.

Methods: An anonymous questionnaire was sent to all German cardiology departments (N = 288).

Results: 48% of cardiology departments responded by sending back 247 completed questionnaires. Most participating cardiologists were experienced when considering the duration of their professional activity. Almost all of the respondents regularly perform check-ups of pacemakers. The majority of cardiologists answering our questionnaire were prepared to deactivate a pacemaker upon patients' request, and have done so. In pacemaker dependency, however, the willingness to withdraw decreases, even if death is imminent, for fear of causing distressing symptoms, sense of being responsible for patients possible immediate death, or fear of legal consequences.

Conclusions: The survey could clearly show that uncertainties remain among cardiologists dealing with a patient's wish for withdrawal, especially in cases of pacemaker dependency. We suggest that official statements of cardiologic societies in Europe are issued to clarify ethical, legal and practical aspects of pacemaker withdrawal.

Trial registration: Registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00026168) on 30.08.2021.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Research in Cardiology
Clinical Research in Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
140
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Research in Cardiology is an international journal for clinical cardiovascular research. It provides a forum for original and review articles as well as critical perspective articles. Articles are only accepted if they meet stringent scientific standards and have undergone peer review. The journal regularly receives articles from the field of clinical cardiology, angiology, as well as heart and vascular surgery. As the official journal of the German Cardiac Society, it gives a current and competent survey on the diagnosis and therapy of heart and vascular diseases.
期刊最新文献
ACEF score and lactate: lifeline predictors in endocarditis valve procedures: insights from a single-center study. Percutaneous aspiration for shortening time to blood cultures sterilization in right-sided infective endocarditis and vegetations. In-hospital bioimpedance-derived total body water predicts short-term cardiovascular mortality and re-hospitalizations in acute decompensated heart failure patients. Overlapping obstructive sleep apnea and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Influence of diabetes and obesity on ten-year outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting in the arterial revascularisation trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1