Patient satisfaction, safety and efficacy of nurse-led compared to physician-led implantation of cardiac monitors.

Steinhauer, Barbara; Dütschler, Sophie; Spicher, Jasmin; Aerschmann, Sarah; Ambord, Nicole; Bartkowiak, Joanna; Tawo, Serlha; Thalmann, Gregor; Servatius, Helge; Noti, Fabian; Seiler, Jens; Baldinger, Samuel; Haeberlin, Andreas; Madaffari, Antonio; Tanner, Hildegard; Reichlin, Tobias; Roten, Laurent (2023). Patient satisfaction, safety and efficacy of nurse-led compared to physician-led implantation of cardiac monitors. (In Press). European journal of cardiovascular nursing Oxford University Press 10.1093/eurjcn/zvad103

[img] Text
zvad103.pdf - Accepted Version
Restricted to registered users only until 18 October 2024.
Available under License Publisher holds Copyright.

Download (679kB) | Request a copy

AIMS

Implantation of an implantable cardiac monitor (ICM) is a simple procedure, but adds significant and increasing workload to the arrhythmia service. In 2020, we established a nurse-led ICM implantation service. We aimed to analyze patient satisfaction, adverse events during implant and ICM re-interventions with nurse-led ICM implantation (N-Implant) compared to physician-led ICM implantation (P-Implant).

METHOD AND RESULTS

From January 2020 to December 2021 we included all consecutive patients implanted with an ICM in a prospective registry. We collected data on patient characteristics, implant procedure and follow-up. Patients were interviewed by phone four weeks after ICM implantation.Of 321 patients implanted with an ICM (median age 67 years; 33% women), 189 (59%) were N-Implants. More N-Implants were performed in the outpatient clinic compared to P-Implants (95% vs. 8%; p<0.001). Two N-Implant patients experienced vaso-vagal reaction during implantation (1%), whereas no adverse events occurred during P-Implant (p=0.51). 297 patients (93%) completed the questionnaire. Duration of pain was shorter and wound closure after 2 weeks better following N-Implant (p=0.019 and p=0.018). A minor bruise or swelling at the implant site was reported more frequently after N-Implant (p=0.003 and p=0.041). Patient satisfaction was excellent with both N-Implant and P-Implant (99% and 97%; p=0.16). After a median follow-up of 242 days (range 7-725 days), five ICMs (2%) were explanted prematurely, without differences among groups. Reasons for premature explants were local discomfort (n=2), infection, MRI and ICM malfunction.

CONCLUSION

Nurse-led ICM implantation has excellent patient satisfaction without compromising safety. N-Implant both expands nursing competencies and reduces physician workload.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Cardiovascular Disorders (DHGE) > Clinic of Cardiology
04 Faculty of Medicine > Pre-clinic Human Medicine > BioMedical Research (DBMR) > DBMR Forschung Mu35 > Forschungsgruppe Kardiologie
04 Faculty of Medicine > Pre-clinic Human Medicine > BioMedical Research (DBMR) > DBMR Forschung Mu35 > Forschungsgruppe Kardiologie

UniBE Contributor:

Bartkowiak, Joanna, Tawo, Serlha, Thalmann, Gregor, Servatius, Helge Simon (B), Noti, Fabian, Seiler, Jens, Baldinger, Samuel Hannes, Häberlin, Andreas David Heinrich, Madaffari, Antonio, Tanner, Hildegard, Reichlin, Tobias Roman, Roten, Laurent

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

1474-5151

Publisher:

Oxford University Press

Language:

English

Submitter:

Pubmed Import

Date Deposited:

25 Oct 2023 08:58

Last Modified:

27 Oct 2023 06:51

Publisher DOI:

10.1093/eurjcn/zvad103

PubMed ID:

37851866

Uncontrolled Keywords:

Nurse adverse events efficacy implantable cardiac monitor outpatient patient satisfaction safety

BORIS DOI:

10.48350/187286

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/187286

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback