IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v19y2010i15-16p2081-2089.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A literature review comparing the experiences and emergent needs of adult patients with permanent pacemakers (PPMs) and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs)

Author

Listed:
  • Jenny Tagney

Abstract

Aims and objectives. This literature review aims to critically appraise any published studies that compare the experiences of patients with permanent pacemakers and those with implantable cardioverter defibrillators. It seeks to identify issues that are similar or unique to one or other group; whether identified needs are being met by current nursing practice and considers how any gaps might be addressed. Background. Increasing numbers of patients are receiving pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) as indications for devices continue to expand worldwide. Technical follow‐up of such patients is well structured. There is an increasing body of knowledge regarding ICD patients’ experiences with promising work testing recovery interventions but less seems to be known about pacemaker patients. Design. Systematic review. Methods. Using an integrative approach, electronic searches using comprehensive search terms were supplemented by following reference lists and key journals from 1975–2008. Conclusion. From the direct comparison studies identified, ICD patients who experience shocks are more likely to report lifestyle limitations than pacemaker patients. However, ICD and pacemaker patients share similar outcomes, with both groups reporting increased anxiety and depression. Whilst experiences of ICD patients have been well reported, experiences of patients receiving pacemakers for any reason and pacemakers or ICDs for heart failure (bi‐ventricular devices or cardiac resynchronisation therapy – CRT) remain largely unknown. Although psychosocial interventions are suggested for both groups, these have apparently only been tested and reported for ICD patients. Relevance to clinical practice. Nurses internationally encounter increasing numbers of patients with pacemakers and ICDs from primary to tertiary clinical care settings, therefore knowledge of patient experiences relating to such devices and their impact is important to inform care planning. Whilst interventions to assist ICD patients are being tested, further research is required regarding the experiences of patients with contemporary pacemakers to inform care planning and potential nursing support interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jenny Tagney, 2010. "A literature review comparing the experiences and emergent needs of adult patients with permanent pacemakers (PPMs) and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs)," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(15‐16), pages 2081-2089, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:15-16:p:2081-2089
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03031.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03031.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03031.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhiying Shen & Feng Zheng & Zhuqing Zhong & Siqing Ding & Lu Wang, 2019. "Effect of peer support on health outcomes in patients with cardiac pacemaker implantation: A randomized, controlled trial," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 269-277, June.
    2. Britta S. Bürker & Randolf I. Hardersen & Knut Tore Lappegård, 2022. "Symptoms of Depression, Anxiety, and Posttraumatic Stress among Patients with Cardiac Pacemakers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-10, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:15-16:p:2081-2089. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.