Implementation, feasibility, and acceptability of quality of life therapy to improve positive emotions among patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators

Addressing PTSD in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Patients: State-of-the-Art Management of ICD Shock and PTSD

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper reviews the unique processes and treatments of post-traumatic stress in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients and posits specific clinical management recommendations.

RECENT FINDINGS

PTSD is a common presenting problem for a prospective ICD patient and is a common response to ICD shocks. Approximately 32% of patients with sudden cardiac arrest report significant PTSD symptoms. Following ICD shock, approximately 20% experience PTSD from the shocks. Regardless, PTSD can interrupt and undermine clinical management from a cardiologist perspective and create significant disturbance in patients and families. Few cardiology clinics are outfitted to effectively manage psychological distress, in general, and PTSD, in particular. Effective management of PTSD patients can be achieved with both direct care in the cardiac clinic, as well as indirect care via multidisciplinary consultation and expertise. The importance of emotional validation, return to physical activity, and family engagement is emphasized in current management.

The effects of positive psychology interventions on well-being and distress in patients with cardiovascular diseases: A systematic review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Positive psychology interventions (PPIs) have been found to be effective for psychiatric and somatic disorders. However, a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the effectiveness of PPIs for patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthesize studies examining the effectiveness of PPIs and to examine their effects on mental well-being and distress using meta-analyses.

METHODS

This study was preregistered on OSF (https://osf.io/95sjg/). A systematic search was performed in PsycINFO, PubMed and Scopus. Studies were included if they examined the effectiveness of PPIs on well-being for patients with CVD. Quality assessment was based on the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias. Three-level mixed-effects meta-regression models were used to analyze effect sizes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

Twenty studies with 1222 participants were included, of which 15 were RCTs. Included studies showed high variability in study and intervention characteristics. Meta-analyses showed significant effects for mental well-being (β = 0.33) and distress (β = 0.34) at post-intervention and the effects were still significant at follow-up. Five of the 15 RCTs were classified as having fair quality, while the remaining had low quality.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that PPIs are effective in improving well-being and distress in patients with CVD and could therefore be a valuable addition for clinical practice. However, there is a need for more rigorous studies that are adequately powered and that help us understand what PPIs are most effective for which patient.

Comparison of depression and anxiety among pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Anxiety and depression among implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) recipients can lead to physical or psychological consequences and reduce the quality of life of these patients. Few studies have compared the frequency and severity of depressive and anxiety disorders in the pacemaker (PM) and ICD recipients. The aim of the present study was to compare depression and anxiety among PM and ICD recipients.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was performed on 296 patients referred to a specialized cardiology teaching hospital from October 1, 2019 to July 1, 2020. Patients were selected using convenience sampling method.

RESULTS

Regarding anxiety, the results showed that the overall prevalence of anxiety in PM, ICD, and control groups was 23.5%, 28%, and 8%, respectively. Results showed no significant difference between PM and ICD recipients regarding the anxiety prevalence (p = .46). With regard to depression, the results showed that the overall prevalence of depression in the PM, ICD, and control groups was 7.1%, 23%, and 4.1%, respectively. The results showed a significant difference between PM and ICD recipients in terms of depression prevalence (p = .03). The results also showed that the prevalence of depression was significantly higher among PM and ICD recipients than the control group (p = .01).

CONCLUSION

Considering the results of the present study and the high prevalence of anxiety and depression, it seems necessary to focus more on educating patients about the effectiveness of PM and ICD devices in reducing anxiety and depression.