[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.163.92.62. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Invited Commentary
April 8, 2013

Less Patient-Centered Care: An Unintended Consequence of Guidelines? Comment on “Patient Perceptions, Physician Communication, and the Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator”

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Division of General Internal Medicine and Phillip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, California (Dr Lin); and Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver (Dr Matlock).

JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(7):578-579. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.4187

Sudden cardiac death is a leading cause of death in the United States and worldwide. The first successful insertion of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in the 1980s heralded a new era of treatment for sudden cardiac death. Although ICDs were initially implanted to prevent the death of patients who had survived a potentially lethal arrhythmia, randomized controlled trials have also demonstrated the efficacy of ICDs for patients at high risk of having a sudden cardiac death.1 Consequently, ICDs have become a guideline-recommended mainstay of treatment for the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×