Women and the implantable cardioverter defibrillator: a lifespan perspective on key psychosocial issues.

The clinical success of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in reducing mortality suggests that more women will be receiving ICDs in the future. The impact of ICD therapy in women is unique in western societies; the ICDs scar and lump in the pectoral area can lead to body image concerns due to the emphasis on women's physical attractiveness. Social support and roles are challenged because women's reaction to stress has been characterized by a "tend and befriend" response, involving cultivating and utilizing social networks, rather than the "fight or flight" response more typical of men. In addition, a woman's identity as a caretaker and caregiver can be threatened by the actual and perceived activity limitations imposed by the ICD or the underlying heart condition. Finally, reproductive and sexual health are important issues, as 25 to 50% of patients with ICDs report concerns in this area, but also report discomfort in discussing these concerns with their health care providers. The purpose of the present paper is to review the relevant literature and to identify the unique impact of the psychosocial issues of body image, social support and roles, and sexual development and reproductive functioning for women with ICDs across the lifespan. In the absence of complete empirical research data on the impact of these concerns, hypotheses to test in future research are offered.

Do patients accept implantable atrial defibrillation therapy? Results from the Patient Atrial Shock Survey of Acceptance and Tolerance (PASSAT) Study.

INTRODUCTION: The Medtronic Jewel AF 7250 is an implantable cardioverter defibrillator with atrial and ventricular therapies (ICD-AT). The ICD-AT is effective in managing atrial tachyarrhythmias (atrial fibrillation [AF]), but patient acceptance remains an issue. This aim of this study was to measure ICD-AT acceptance. METHODS AND RESULTS: ICD-AT acceptance was evaluated in 96 patients enrolled in the "Jewel AF-AF-Only Study" for > or =3 months of follow-up (mean 19 months). Patients were mostly men (72%; age 65 +/- 12 years). Clinical data and a written survey (75% response rate) were used to quantify demographics, AF frequency and symptoms, atrial defibrillation therapy, quality of life (QOL), psychosocial distress, and ICD-AT therapy acceptance. From implant to survey, AF symptom and severity scores decreased by 18% (P < or = 0.05), and QOL (SF-36) scores increased by 15% to 50% (P < or = 0.05). ICD-AT therapy acceptance was high, with 71.3% of patients scoring in the 75th percentile on the Florida Patient Acceptance Survey. ICD-AT acceptance was correlated with the Physical Component Scale and Mental Health Component Scale scores of the SF-36 (r = 0.28 and 0.35, respectively). ICD-AT acceptance was negatively correlated with depressive symptomatology (r =-0.59), trait anxiety (r =-0.48), illness intrusiveness (r =-0.55), and AF symptom and severity scores (r =-0.26). ICD-AT acceptance did not correlate with preimplant cardioversions, number of atrial shocks, AF episodes detected by the device, or device implant duration. CONCLUSION: Most patients accepted ICD-AT therapy. Patients were more likely to accept ICD-AT if they had less psychosocial distress, greater QOL, and lower AF symptom burden.

Sleep quality among patients treated with implantable atrial defibrillation therapy: effect of nocturnal shock delivery and psychological distress.

INTRODUCTION: The Medtronic ICD-AT has atrial/ventricular therapies, which can be programmed to deliver atrial defibrillation during sleep, intended to potentially decrease shock anxiety/pain and lifestyle disruption. However, these shocks may diminish sleep quality. This study examined atrial shock characteristics (i.e., mode, frequency), AF symptoms, and psychological factors as determinants of sleep quality. METHODS AND RESULTS: The 96 ICD-AT patients were mostly men (72%; M age 65 +/- 12 years) and implanted for 1.6 years (SD = 0.8 years). Patients were divided into shock groups based on the proportion of mode (> or =90%) of total atrial shocks received. Patients were grouped into either automatic-nocturnal shock group (8 P.M.-8 A.M.; n = 35) or manual-awake shock group (n = 42). Psychological measures included Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Center for Epidemiology Studies-Depression Scale, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, and Illness Intrusiveness Rating Scale. Atrial fibrillation disease burden was assessed via atrial symptom score and atrial shock use. PSQI global scores were similar between manual (7.67 +/- 2.53) and automatic shock (8.20 +/- 2.93) groups. A multiple hierarchical regression analysis indicated that no atrial shock variables were predictive of sleep quality; yet, both AF symptom (B = 0.226, P = 0.040) and depression (B = 0.392, P = 0.034) scores predicted diminished sleep quality, accounting for 42% of the variance in global sleep quality (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that atrial defibrillation therapy does not have a deleterious impact on sleep. However, the significance of AF symptoms and depression indicate that comprehensive care of both physical and psychological symptomatology may improve sleep quality in ICD-AT patients.