Abstract
Abstract
Background
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-D) are lifesaving treatments for patients at risk for sudden cardiac death. Effective physician–patient communication during the shared decision-making process is essential. Electrophysiologist-patient conversations were targeted to obtain objective data on the interaction, understand the conversation framework, and uncover opportunities for improved communication.
Methods
Individuals previously identified as requiring an ICD/CRT-D but declined implantation were recruited for this four-stage interview and survey-based study. Quantitative analysis of surveys and AI analysis of conversation videos was conducted to evaluate patient participant expectations, analyze feedback about the conversations with study physicians, and gauge willingness for device implantation.
Results
The study included 27 patients (mean age 51 years, 51.9% female) and 9 study physicians. Patients were significantly more willing to undergo ICD/CRT-D implantation after conversing with study physicians compared to their own physicians and pre-conversation surveys (mean scores: 5.0, 3.1, and 4.4 out of 7, respectively; p < 0.001). Patient participants had higher satisfaction with the study conversation, rating study physicians higher in effectiveness of explanations, responsiveness to questions, and overall quality of the conversation compared to their own physicians (all p < 0.001).
Conclusions
In a cohort of patients who previously declined ICD/CRT-D implantation, patient satisfaction and willingness to undergo implantation of a guideline-directed device therapy increased significantly following a structured conversation with study physicians. Identified key elements could be integrated into user-friendly tools and educational materials to facilitate these conversations, improving patient engagement with the decision-making process and enhancing informed acceptance of indicated device therapies.
Graphical abstract
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference25 articles.
1. Kusumoto FM, Schoenfeld MH, Wilkoff BL, et al. 2017 HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14(12):e503–51.
2. LaPointe NM, Al-Khatib SM, Piccini JP, et al. Extent of and reasons for nonuse of implantable cardioverter defibrillator devices in clinical practice among eligible patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011;4(2):146–51.
3. Curtis AB, Manrodt C, Jacobsen LD, Soderlund D, Fonarow GC. Guideline-directed device therapies in heart failure: a clinical practice-based analysis using electronic health record data. Am Heart J Plus. 2022;16:100139.
4. Januszkiewicz L, Barra S, Marijon E, et al. Major gaps in the information provided to patients before implantation of cardioverter defibrillators: a prospective patient European evaluation. Europace. 2023;25(3):1144–51.
5. Pedersen SS, Knudsen C, Dilling K, Sandgaard NCF, Johansen JB. Living with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator: patients’ preferences and needs for information provision and care options. Europace. 2017;19(6):983–90.