Cited by 260Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementCardiac Health and Mental Health

Quality of Life with Defibrillator Therapy or Amiodarone in Heart Failure

Open access
Mark, Daniel B., Anstrom, Kevin J., Sun, Jie L., Clapp-Channing, Nancy E., Tsiatis, Anastasios A., Davidson-Ray, Linda, Lee, Kerry L., Bardy, Gust H.·2008·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy significantly prolongs life in patients at increased risk for sudden death from depressed left ventricular function. However, whether this increased longevity is accompanied by deterioration in the quality of life is unclear. METHODS: In a randomized trial, we compared ICD therapy or amiodarone with state-of-the-art medical therapy alone in 2521 patients who had stable heart failure with depressed left ventricular function. We prospectively measured quality of life at baseline and at months 3, 12, and 30; data collection was 93 to 98% complete. The Duke Activity Status Index (which measures cardiac physical functioning) and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Mental Health Inventory 5 (which measures psychological well-being) were prespecified primary outcomes. Multiple additional quality-of-life outcomes were also examined. RESULTS: Psychological well-being in the ICD group, as compared with medical therapy alone, was significantly improved at 3 months (P=0.01) and at 12 months (P=0.003) but not at 30 months. No clinically or statistically significant differences in physical functioning among the study groups were observed. Additional quality-of-life measures were improved in the ICD group at 3 months, 12 months, or both, but there was no significant difference at 30 months. ICD shocks in the month preceding a scheduled assessment were associated with a decreased quality of life in multiple domains. The use of amiodarone had no significant effects on the primary quality-of-life outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In a large primary-prevention population with moderately symptomatic heart failure, single-lead ICD therapy was not associated with any detectable adverse quality-of-life effects during 30 months of follow-up.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa0706719

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some studies have found no significant differences in overall quality of life between ICD patients and other cardiac patients, pacemaker patients, or the general population.

    “Some studies have found no significant differences in overall QOL between ICD patients and other cardiac patients, 2,3 PM patients, or the general population.4”

    From Managing with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (2013) · cites this paper as [3]

    The Results (Quality of Life Outcomes; page unavailable) found no significant difference between ICD and placebo patients in self-rated overall health at 30 months. But ICD patients rated their overall health significantly higher at 3 and 12 months, so an unqualified claim of no significant difference overstates this study. The citation placement associates this source with the comparison to other cardiac patients, not the comparisons to pacemaker patients or the general population. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mark, D. B., Anstrom, K. J., Sun, J. L., Clapp-Channing, N. E., Tsiatis, A. A., Davidson-Ray, L., Lee, K. L., & Bardy, G. H.
Affiliations
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • Duke Clinical Research Institute (US)
  • North Carolina State University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2008-09-04
Volume
359
Issue
10
Pages
999-1008
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2117271182
Cited by
260
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 22
FWCI
18.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01 HL55496, U01 HL55766, U01-HL55297), U01HL055297, U01HL055766, U01HL055496)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, amiodarone, heart failure, quality of life, psychological well-being, physical function, ICD shocks, sudden cardiac death, depressed left ventricular function, primary prevention
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Amiodarone, Anti-Arrhythmia Agents, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Heart Failure, Humans, Male, Quality of Life, Survival Analysis, Defibrillators, Implantable

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review