Tools

LEADER 05593cam a2200577 i 4500

001 on1371248839;

003 OCoLC;

005 20240502113219.0;

006 m o d ;

007 cr unu||||||||;

008 230227s2022 ncua obm 000 0 eng d;

035 a| (Sirsi) o1371248839;

035 a| (OCoLC)1371248839;

049 a| EREE;

090 a| RC682;

100 1 a| Force, Zachary,e| author.?| UNAUTHORIZED;

245 10 a| Differences in device acceptance in individuals with pacemakers and ICDs /c| by Zachary Force.;

264 1 a| [Greenville, N.C.] :b| [East Carolina University],c| 2022.;

300 a| 1 online resource (65 pages) :b| illustrations (some color);

336 a| textb| txt2| rdacontent;

337 a| computerb| c2| rdamedia;

338 a| online resourceb| cr2| rdacarrier;

347 a| text fileb| PDFc| 429.1 KB2| rda;

538 a| System requirements: Adobe Reader.;

538 a| Mode of access: World Wide Web.;

502 b| Ph.D.c| East Carolina Universityd| 2022.;

500 a| Presented to the faculty of the Department of Psychology;

500 a| Advisor: Samuel F. Sears;

500 a| Title from .PDF title page (viewed May 1, 2024).;

504 a| Includes bibliographical references.;

520 3 a| Background: Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States (Benjamin et al., 2019) and triggers a host of concerns about virtually all aspects of a patient's life including physical and psychological health. Treatment for heart conditions often utilizes implantable technology, such as ICDs and pacemakers, that reduce mortality (Al-Khatib et al., 2017; Simon & Janz 1982). Research on this technology and its effect on QoL is mixed, with some findings indicting positive effects of ICDs on QoL, while others have shown an increase of psychological disorders and decreased QoL (Magyar-Russell et al., 2011). Device specific QoL-related concerns include acceptance of the technology into the patient's life (Burns, Serber, Keim, & Sears, 2005) and fear, worry, or avoidance related to ICD shocks (Ford et al., 2012). Health care providers typically obtain information from the device during in-clinic visits to better understand the course of the disease and guide treatment decisions. More recently, continued technological advances allow caregivers to monitor a patient's device remotely (Braunschweig, Anker, Proff, & Varma, 2019). This new method of patient care reduces health care costs, reduces the number of required clinic visits and has comparable survival rates as compared to in clinic visits (Parthiban et al., 2015). Remote monitoring may be particularly valuable in single-payor health systems such as Canada. Remote monitoring has been shown to be comparable to usual care for ICD patients, but patient reported outcomes such as QOL, are understudied (Versteeg at al., 2014). Purpose: The current study seeks to examine cardiac patients with an implantable device, ICDs or pacemakers, who have received remote monitoring and compare differences between these groups and change over time on patient reported outcomes such as patient acceptance, health security, and shock anxiety. There were three hypotheses for the study 1) Individuals with ICDs will have lower device acceptance and health security than individuals with pacemakers. 2) Both groups (ICDs and Pacemakers) will have lower levels of device acceptance and health security at baseline as compared to 12-month follow-up. 3) ICD patients will have higher shock anxiety at baseline as compared to 12-month follow-up. Methods: Data was collected on 176 participants who were part of the Remote Patient Management for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (RPM-CIED- Pilot). Three analyses were conducted including a principal components analysis on the novel construct of Health security, a 2x2 mixed model ANOVA and a dependent samples t-test. Results: Health Security was found to be comprised of 2 factors: Positive and Negative Outlook. Health Security total score significantly decreased over time for both pacemaker and ICD patients. Device acceptance did not differ over time or by device type. There was no change in shock anxiety over time. Conclusion: Device specific QoL remained stable during the one-year study period and did not differ significantly based on device type. Patient reported health security declined and may warrant attention in future clinical and research considerations to examine its potential utility and its relationship to QOL.;

650 0 a| Cardiac pacemakersx| Psychological aspects.=| ^A490371;

650 0 a| Implantable cardioverter-defibrillatorsx| Psychological aspects.=| ^A714371;

650 0 a| Quality of life.=| ^A8135;

650 0 a| Patient monitoring.=| ^A6226;

653 a| Remote patient monitoring;

653 a| ICD;

653 a| cardiac device;

653 a| patient reported outcomes;

700 1 a| Sears, Samuel F.,c| Jr.,e| degree supervisor.=| ^A1483856;

710 2 a| East Carolina University.b| Department of Psychology.?| UNAUTHORIZED;

856 40 z| Access via ScholarShipu| http://hdl.handle.net/10342/12263;

949 a| Click on web addressw| ASISh| JOYNER101;

949 a| Click on web addressw| ASISh| HSL111;

994 a| C0b| ERE;

596 a| 1 4;

998 a| 5961403;

999 a| CLICK ON WEB ADDRESSw| ASISc| 1i| 5961403-1001l| JNETm| JOYNERr| Ys| Yt| JNE3ETDu| 3/1/2023x| ETDz| JERESOURCE;

999 a| CLICK ON WEB ADDRESSw| ASISc| 1i| 5961403-2001l| HSLELECm| HSLr| Ys| Yt| HEETDu| 3/1/2023x| ETDz| HERESOURCE;

Differences in device acceptance in individuals with pacemakers and ICDs / by Zachary Force.

Author/creator	Force, Zachary author.
Other author	Sears, Samuel F., Jr., degree supervisor.
Other author	East Carolina University. Department of Psychology.
Format	Theses and dissertations
Publication	[Greenville, N.C.] : [East Carolina University], 2022.
Description	1 online resource (65 pages) : illustrations (some color)
Supplemental Content	Access via ScholarShip
Subjects	Heart--Diseases. --Patients. --Attitudes. Cardiac pacemakers--Psychological aspects. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators--Psychological aspects. Quality of life. Patient monitoring.

Summary	Background: Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States (Benjamin et al., 2019) and triggers a host of concerns about virtually all aspects of a patient's life including physical and psychological health. Treatment for heart conditions often utilizes implantable technology, such as ICDs and pacemakers, that reduce mortality (Al-Khatib et al., 2017; Simon & Janz 1982). Research on this technology and its effect on QoL is mixed, with some findings indicting positive effects of ICDs on QoL, while others have shown an increase of psychological disorders and decreased QoL (Magyar-Russell et al., 2011). Device specific QoL-related concerns include acceptance of the technology into the patient's life (Burns, Serber, Keim, & Sears, 2005) and fear, worry, or avoidance related to ICD shocks (Ford et al., 2012). Health care providers typically obtain information from the device during in-clinic visits to better understand the course of the disease and guide treatment decisions. More recently, continued technological advances allow caregivers to monitor a patient's device remotely (Braunschweig, Anker, Proff, & Varma, 2019). This new method of patient care reduces health care costs, reduces the number of required clinic visits and has comparable survival rates as compared to in clinic visits (Parthiban et al., 2015). Remote monitoring may be particularly valuable in single-payor health systems such as Canada. Remote monitoring has been shown to be comparable to usual care for ICD patients, but patient reported outcomes such as QOL, are understudied (Versteeg at al., 2014). Purpose: The current study seeks to examine cardiac patients with an implantable device, ICDs or pacemakers, who have received remote monitoring and compare differences between these groups and change over time on patient reported outcomes such as patient acceptance, health security, and shock anxiety. There were three hypotheses for the study 1) Individuals with ICDs will have lower device acceptance and health security than individuals with pacemakers. 2) Both groups (ICDs and Pacemakers) will have lower levels of device acceptance and health security at baseline as compared to 12-month follow-up. 3) ICD patients will have higher shock anxiety at baseline as compared to 12-month follow-up. Methods: Data was collected on 176 participants who were part of the Remote Patient Management for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (RPM-CIED- Pilot). Three analyses were conducted including a principal components analysis on the novel construct of Health security, a 2x2 mixed model ANOVA and a dependent samples t-test. Results: Health Security was found to be comprised of 2 factors: Positive and Negative Outlook. Health Security total score significantly decreased over time for both pacemaker and ICD patients. Device acceptance did not differ over time or by device type. There was no change in shock anxiety over time. Conclusion: Device specific QoL remained stable during the one-year study period and did not differ significantly based on device type. Patient reported health security declined and may warrant attention in future clinical and research considerations to examine its potential utility and its relationship to QOL.
General note	Presented to the faculty of the Department of Psychology
General note	Advisor: Samuel F. Sears
General note	Title from .PDF title page (viewed May 1, 2024).
Dissertation note	Ph.D. East Carolina University 2022.
Bibliography note	Includes bibliographical references.
Technical details	System requirements: Adobe Reader.
Technical details	Mode of access: World Wide Web.

Availability

Library	Location	Call Number	Status	Item Actions
	Electronic Resources	Access Content Online	✔ Available

Differences in device acceptance in individuals with pacemakers and ICDs / by Zachary Force.

Click here for more information about this title

Availability