Volume 7, Issue 11, Pages 1537-1542 (November 2010) Ethical and legal views of physicians regarding deactivation of cardiac implantable electrical devices: A quantitative assessment Daniel B. Kramer, MD, Aaron S. Kesselheim, MD, JD, MPH, Dan W. Brock, PhD, William H. Maisel, MD, MPH, FHRS Heart Rhythm Volume 7, Issue 11, Pages 1537-1542 (November 2010) DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2010.07.018 Copyright © 2010 Heart Rhythm Society Terms and Conditions
Figure 1 Definitions provided to study participants. Heart Rhythm 2010 7, 1537-1542DOI: (10.1016/j.hrthm.2010.07.018) Copyright © 2010 Heart Rhythm Society Terms and Conditions
Figure 2 Physicians' lack of comfort discussing withdrawal of specific life-sustaining therapies. *P <.005 for comparison of mechanical ventilation, feeding tubes, and dialysis vs each of three cardiac device options. ICD = implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; PM = pacemaker. Heart Rhythm 2010 7, 1537-1542DOI: (10.1016/j.hrthm.2010.07.018) Copyright © 2010 Heart Rhythm Society Terms and Conditions
Figure 3 Percentage of physicians who viewed withdrawal of pacemaker (PM) (red hatched bars) or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (blue solid bars) therapy to be morally different compared to withdrawal of other life-sustaining therapy. P <.001 for ICD vs PM for mechanical ventilation or dialysis; P =.016 for ICD vs PM for feeding tube; P = NS for ICD vs PM for chest compressions. Heart Rhythm 2010 7, 1537-1542DOI: (10.1016/j.hrthm.2010.07.018) Copyright © 2010 Heart Rhythm Society Terms and Conditions