4.1 Article

Female-Specific Education, Management, and Lifestyle Enhancement for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Patients: The FEMALE-ICD Study

Journal

PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 33, Issue 9, Pages 1131-1140

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2010.02787.x

Keywords

implantable cardioverter defibrillator; women; psychosocial intervention; anxiety; device acceptance

Funding

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [F31HL083764]
  2. Medtronic
  3. St. Jude Medical

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Method: Twenty-nine women were recruited for the study. Fourteen women were randomized to the intervention group and participated in a psychosocial intervention focused on female-specific issues; 15 were randomized to the wait-list control group. All women completed individual psychological batteries at baseline and at 1-month follow-up measuring shock anxiety and device acceptance. Results: Pre-post measures of shock anxiety demonstrated a significant time by group interaction effect with the intervention group having a significantly greater decrease (Pillai's trace = 5.58, P = 0.026). A significant interaction effect (Pillai's trace = 5.05, P = 0.046) was found, such that women under the age of 50 experienced greater reduction in shock anxiety than their middle-aged cohorts. Pre-post measures of device acceptance revealed a significant time by group interaction effect with the intervention group having significantly greater increases (Pillai's trace = 5.80, P = 0.023). Conclusions: Structured interventions for female ICD patients involving ICD-specific education, cognitive behavioral therapy strategies, and group social support provide improvements in shock anxiety and device acceptance at 1-month re-assessment. Young women appear to be an at-risk subgroup of this population and may experience more benefit from psychosocial treatment targeting device-specific concerns. (PACE 2010; 33:1131-1140).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available