Follow-up of patients with new cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: are experts' recommendations implemented in routine clinical practice?
| dc.contributor.author | Al-Khatib, Sana M | |
| dc.contributor.author | Mi, Xiaojuan | |
| dc.contributor.author | Wilkoff, Bruce L | |
| dc.contributor.author | Qualls, Laura G | |
| dc.contributor.author | Frazier-Mills, Camille | |
| dc.contributor.author | Setoguchi, Soko | |
| dc.contributor.author | Hess, Paul L | |
| dc.contributor.author | Curtis, Lesley H | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-04-04T21:58:58Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-04-04T21:58:58Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2013-02 | |
| dc.description.abstract | BackgroundA 2008 expert consensus statement outlined the minimum frequency of follow-up of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).Methods and resultsWe studied 38 055 Medicare beneficiaries who received a new CIED between January 1, 2005, and June 30, 2009. The main outcome measure was variation of follow-up by patient factors and year of device implantation. We determined the number of patients who were eligible for and attended an in-person CIED follow-up visit within 2 to 12 weeks, 0 to 16 weeks, and 1 year after implantation. Among eligible patients, 42.4% had an initial in-person visit within 2 to 12 weeks. This visit was significantly more common among white patients than black patients and patients of other races (43.0% versus 36.8% versus 40.5%; P<0.001). Follow-up within 2 to 12 weeks improved from 40.3% in 2005 to 55.1% in 2009 (P<0.001 for trend). The rate of follow-up within 0 to 16 weeks was 65.1% and improved considerably from 2005 to 2009 (62.3%-79.6%; P<0.001 for trend). Within 1 year, 78.0% of the overall population had at least 1 in-person CIED follow-up visit.ConclusionsAlthough most Medicare beneficiaries who received a new CIED between 2005 and 2009 did not have an initial in-person CIED follow-up visit within 2 to 12 weeks after device implantation, the rate of initial follow-up improved appreciably over time. This CIED follow-up visit was significantly more common in white patients than in patients of other races. | |
| dc.identifier | CIRCEP.112.974337 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1941-3149 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1941-3084 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | ||
| dc.language | eng | |
| dc.publisher | Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology | |
| dc.relation.isversionof | 10.1161/circep.112.974337 | |
| dc.rights.uri | ||
| dc.subject | Humans | |
| dc.subject | Treatment Outcome | |
| dc.subject | Electric Countershock | |
| dc.subject | Aftercare | |
| dc.subject | Chi-Square Distribution | |
| dc.subject | Follow-Up Studies | |
| dc.subject | Equipment Design | |
| dc.subject | Defibrillators, Implantable | |
| dc.subject | Time Factors | |
| dc.subject | Aged | |
| dc.subject | Aged, 80 and over | |
| dc.subject | Medicare | |
| dc.subject | Continuity of Patient Care | |
| dc.subject | Guideline Adherence | |
| dc.subject | United States | |
| dc.subject | Female | |
| dc.subject | Male | |
| dc.subject | Practice Guidelines as Topic | |
| dc.subject | Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy | |
| dc.subject | Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices | |
| dc.subject | Practice Patterns, Physicians' | |
| dc.subject | White People | |
| dc.subject | Black or African American | |
| dc.title | Follow-up of patients with new cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: are experts' recommendations implemented in routine clinical practice? | |
| dc.type | Journal article | |
| duke.contributor.orcid | Al-Khatib, Sana M|0000-0002-3561-0146 | |
| duke.contributor.orcid | Curtis, Lesley H|0000-0002-3286-9371 | |
| pubs.begin-page | 108 | |
| pubs.end-page | 116 | |
| pubs.issue | 1 | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Duke | |
| pubs.organisational-group | School of Medicine | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Staff | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Basic Science Departments | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Clinical Science Departments | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Institutes and Centers | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Medicine | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Medicine, Cardiology | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Medicine, General Internal Medicine | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Duke Clinical Research Institute | |
| pubs.organisational-group | University Initiatives & Academic Support Units | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Initiatives | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Population Health Sciences | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Duke - Margolis Center For Health Policy | |
| pubs.publication-status | Published | |
| pubs.volume | 6 |
Files
Original bundle
- Name:
- Follow-up of patients with new cardiovascular implantable electronic devices are experts recommendations implemented in rout.pdf
- Size:
- 829.67 KB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format