Search

Background: Patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of pacemaker (PM) patients has increasingly become an important issue of health care evaluation. Currently, knowledge of pacing performance and technology is more or less outlined. However, determinants of poor or good HRQoL of paced patients require further elucidation., Objectives: The purpose of this study is to determine the HRQoL 1 year after PM implantation and predictors of differences in HRQoL between pre- and post-PM implantation., Methods: We quantified the mean differences between HRQoL before implantation (baseline) and 1 year later, assessed with the generic Medical Outcomes Survey 36-Item Short-Form Survey and EuroQol (EQ5D), and the PM patient-specific AQUAREL (Assessment of QUality of life And RElated events) questionnaires, in 501 consecutively included patients in the Dutch multicenter longitudinal FOLLOWPACE cohort study. Multivariable linear regression modeling was then performed to determine predictive factors of the HRQoL 1 year after implantation., Results: The HRQoL of the patients increased markedly in the first year after implantation. Seventy percent of the patients considered their health improved, whereas 11% experienced a complete recovery in HRQoL. The most important predictors for improved HRQoL after 1 year were HRQoL at baseline, age, presence of cardiac comorbidities, and atrial fibrillation with slow ventricular response as indication for chronic pacing., Conclusion: In most patients receiving a PM, HRQoL increased in the first year after PM implantation. Knowledge of the predictors of this increase may aid physicians to timely differentiate between patients who most likely will benefit most from PM implantation in terms of HRQoL.

Background: Studies on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients awaiting pacemaker (PM) implantation are scarce, or executed in specific patient subgroups (regarding age or specific cardiac rhythm disorders). The purpose of this study was to systematically assess the HRQoL in a large unselected cohort of patients with a conventional indication for PM therapy., Methods: Pre-PM implantation HRQoL (measured with the SF-36 questionnaire, completed at hospital admission) of 818 consecutive Dutch patients included in the FOLLOWPACE study was compared with the HRQoL in a sample of the general Dutch population, and with several cohorts of patients with other conditions. Linear regression analysis was performed to analyze determinants of this HRQoL., Results: Almost all SF-36 subscale scores were substantially and significantly lower in the PM patients compared to the general population, with P-values < 0.001 in all SF-36 subscales except for "pain" and "general health perception." In the PM patients, presence of comorbidities, gender, and age were significantly associated with the overall physical component summary score (mean 38.8 +/- 27 standard deviation) whereas the overall mental component summary score (46.8 +/- 27.0) was associated with gender and age., Conclusion: The HRQoL of patients before first PM implantation is significantly lower than that of a general population and also various other patient populations. Physicians should be aware of this unfavorable condition and keep the time interval between the diagnosis of a cardiac rhythm disorder requiring PM implantation and the implantation procedure as short as possible.

Aims: Despite an annual rise in the numbers of patients receiving their first pacemaker (PM), the risks of the implantation procedure remains unclear. The purpose of this prospective study is to estimate the incidence of in-hospital events after first PM implantation and to determine the predictors of these events., Methods and Results: Patients with conventional pacing diagnosis were included in the Dutch multicentre FOLLOWPACE PM registry that prospectively documented patients' prognosis and quality of life, and PM events after first implantation. From these registry characteristics, implantation data and in-hospital findings were analysed as potential predictors for events in a sample of 1198 patients. In 111 patients studied, at least one serious in-hospital event occurred (incidence 10.1%, 95%CI: 8.9-12.3). Six variables, i.e. a lower body mass index, presence of heart failure in medical history, main indication for implantation, vena subclavia use for venous access, active atrial lead fixation, and the implantation of a dual chamber system, were found to be independent predictors of events after first PM implantation. The overall multivariable model yielded an ROC area of 0.65 (95%CI: 0.60-0.70)., Conclusion: This large prospective multicentre study identified six variables as independent predictors for serious in-hospital events after first implantation. This may assist the implanting cardiologist and surgeon to identify patients at higher risk, during and immediately after PM implantation.