loading page

Patients’ and Family Members’ Views on Pacemaker Reuse: an International Survey
  • +13
  • Andrew Hughey,
  • Palaniappan Muthappan,
  • Auroa Badin,
  • Timir Baman,
  • Naila Baig-Ansari,
  • Fayez Jawed,
  • Abdul Khan,
  • Qingmei Jiang,
  • Katherine Hughey,
  • Rolando Toruño,
  • Christian Machado,
  • Marwan Refaat,
  • Patrick Zakka,
  • Mostafa Hotait,
  • Kim Eagle,
  • Thomas Crawford
Andrew Hughey
University of Michigan Michigan Medicine
Author Profile
Palaniappan Muthappan
Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine
Author Profile
Auroa Badin
The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
Author Profile
Timir Baman
OSF Healthcare
Author Profile
Naila Baig-Ansari
Indus Hospital
Author Profile
Fayez Jawed
Sofregen Inc.
Author Profile
Abdul Khan
Indus Hospital
Author Profile
Qingmei Jiang
University of Michigan Michigan Medicine
Author Profile
Katherine Hughey
University of Michigan Michigan Medicine
Author Profile
Rolando Toruño
Centro Nacional Cardiologia
Author Profile
Christian Machado
Providence Hospital and Medical Center
Author Profile
Marwan Refaat
American University of Beirut Medical Center
Author Profile
Patrick Zakka
Emory University School of Medicine
Author Profile
Mostafa Hotait
American University of Beirut Medical Center
Author Profile
Kim Eagle
University of Michigan Michigan Medicine
Author Profile
Thomas Crawford
University of Michigan
Author Profile

Abstract

Introduction The reuse of cardiac implantable electronic devices may help increase access to these therapies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). No published data exist regarding the views of patients and family members in LMICs regarding this practice. Methods and Results A paper questionnaire eliciting attitudes regarding pacemaker reuse was administered to ambulatory adult patients and patients’ family members at outpatient clinics at Centro Nacional Cardiologia in Managua, Nicaragua, Indus Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan, Hospital Carlos Andrade Marín and Hospital Eugenio Espejo in Quito, Ecuador, and American University of Beirut Medical Center in Beirut, Lebanon. There were 945 responses (Nicaragua – 100; Pakistan – 493; Ecuador – 252; Lebanon – 100). A majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they would be willing to accept a reused pacemaker if risks were similar to a new device (707, 75%), if there were a higher risk of device failure compared to a new device (584, 70%), or if there were a higher risk of infection compared to a new device (458, 56%). A large majority would be willing to donate their own pacemaker at the time of their death (884, 96%) or the device of a family member (805, 93%). Respondents who were unable to afford a new device were more likely to be willing to accept a reused device (79% vs. 63%, P<0.001). Conclusions Patients and their family members support the concept of pacemaker reuse for patients who cannot afford new devices.

Peer review status:IN REVISION

29 Nov 2020Submitted to Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
23 Feb 2021Submission Checks Completed
23 Feb 2021Assigned to Editor
28 Feb 2021Reviewer(s) Assigned
14 Mar 2021Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
16 Mar 2021Editorial Decision: Revise Minor
27 Apr 20211st Revision Received
28 Aug 2021Submission Checks Completed
28 Aug 2021Assigned to Editor
28 Aug 2021Reviewer(s) Assigned
12 Sep 2021Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
13 Sep 2021Editorial Decision: Revise Minor