Comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”

Johannes Sperzel,1 Ingo Staudacher,2 Olaf Goeing,3 Martin Stockburger,4 Thorsten Meyer,5 Ana Sofia Oliveira Gonçalves,6 Hanna Sydow,6 Tonio Schoenfelder,6 Volker Amelung6 1Department of Cardiology, Hospital Kerckhoff Klinik GmbH, Bad Nauheim, Germany; 2Department of Cardiology, Medical Un...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Sperzel J, Staudacher I, Goeing O, Stockburger M, Meyer T, Oliveira Gonçalves AS, Sydow H, Schoenfelder T, Amelung V
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:	sudden cardiac arrest wearable cardioverter defibrillators ICD WCD health technology assessment Medical technology R855-855.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/753825d033964573b850bf31416b9e36
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:753825d033964573b850bf31416b9e36
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:753825d033964573b850bf31416b9e362021-12-02T03:53:34ZComments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”1179-1470https://doaj.org/article/753825d033964573b850bf31416b9e362018-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.dovepress.com/comments-on-the-authorsrsquo-reply-to-the-critical-appraisal-concernin-peer-reviewed-article-MDERhttps://doaj.org/toc/1179-1470Johannes Sperzel,1 Ingo Staudacher,2 Olaf Goeing,3 Martin Stockburger,4 Thorsten Meyer,5 Ana Sofia Oliveira Gonçalves,6 Hanna Sydow,6 Tonio Schoenfelder,6 Volker Amelung6 1Department of Cardiology, Hospital Kerckhoff Klinik GmbH, Bad Nauheim, Germany; 2Department of Cardiology, Medical University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 3Department of Cardiology, Sana-Hospital Lichtenberg, Berlin, Germany; 4Medical Department I, Havelland Kliniken GmbH, Nauen, Germany; 5Department of Public Health, Universität Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany; 6inav – privates Institut für angewandte Versorgungsforschung GmbH, Berlin, GermanySince the authors’ reply to our critical appraisal did not properly address the points we raised, we still see need for further clarification. The wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is not an adequate substitute for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The authors state that both can be compared immediately post-myocardial infarction (MI). According to the current guidelines, primary prevention of sudden cardiac death with the ICD within 40 days after MI is generally not indicated.1 Therefore, we disagree with the authors’ proposal of conducting such a trial. In this context, the authors mentioned the VEST trial, which compares a WCD population and one receiving medical treatment. There is explicitly no comparison to an ICD population.View the original paper by Sperzel and colleagues.Sperzel JStaudacher IGoeing OStockburger MMeyer TOliveira Gonçalves ASSydow HSchoenfelder TAmelung VDove Medical Pressarticlesudden cardiac arrestwearable cardioverter defibrillatorsICDWCDhealth technology assessmentMedical technologyR855-855.5ENMedical Devices: Evidence and Research, Vol Volume 11, Pp 377-378 (2018)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	sudden cardiac arrest wearable cardioverter defibrillators ICD WCD health technology assessment Medical technology R855-855.5
spellingShingle	sudden cardiac arrest wearable cardioverter defibrillators ICD WCD health technology assessment Medical technology R855-855.5 Sperzel J Staudacher I Goeing O Stockburger M Meyer T Oliveira Gonçalves AS Sydow H Schoenfelder T Amelung V Comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”
description	Johannes Sperzel,1 Ingo Staudacher,2 Olaf Goeing,3 Martin Stockburger,4 Thorsten Meyer,5 Ana Sofia Oliveira Gonçalves,6 Hanna Sydow,6 Tonio Schoenfelder,6 Volker Amelung6 1Department of Cardiology, Hospital Kerckhoff Klinik GmbH, Bad Nauheim, Germany; 2Department of Cardiology, Medical University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 3Department of Cardiology, Sana-Hospital Lichtenberg, Berlin, Germany; 4Medical Department I, Havelland Kliniken GmbH, Nauen, Germany; 5Department of Public Health, Universität Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany; 6inav – privates Institut für angewandte Versorgungsforschung GmbH, Berlin, GermanySince the authors’ reply to our critical appraisal did not properly address the points we raised, we still see need for further clarification. The wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is not an adequate substitute for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The authors state that both can be compared immediately post-myocardial infarction (MI). According to the current guidelines, primary prevention of sudden cardiac death with the ICD within 40 days after MI is generally not indicated.1 Therefore, we disagree with the authors’ proposal of conducting such a trial. In this context, the authors mentioned the VEST trial, which compares a WCD population and one receiving medical treatment. There is explicitly no comparison to an ICD population.View the original paper by Sperzel and colleagues.
format	article
author	Sperzel J Staudacher I Goeing O Stockburger M Meyer T Oliveira Gonçalves AS Sydow H Schoenfelder T Amelung V
author_facet	Sperzel J Staudacher I Goeing O Stockburger M Meyer T Oliveira Gonçalves AS Sydow H Schoenfelder T Amelung V
author_sort	Sperzel J
title	Comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”
title_short	Comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”
title_full	Comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”
title_fullStr	Comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”
title_full_unstemmed	Comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”
title_sort	comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”
publisher	Dove Medical Press
publishDate	2018
url	https://doaj.org/article/753825d033964573b850bf31416b9e36
work_keys_str_mv	AT sperzelj commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo AT staudacheri commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo AT goeingo commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo AT stockburgerm commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo AT meyert commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo AT oliveiragoncalvesas commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo AT sydowh commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo AT schoenfeldert commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo AT amelungv commentsontheauthorsrsquoreplytothecriticalappraisalconcerningldquowearablecardioverterdefibrillatorsforthepreventionofsuddencardiacarrestahealthtechnologyassessmentandpatientfocusgroupstudyrdquo
_version_	1718401558011445248

Comments on the authors&rsquo; reply to the critical appraisal concerning &ldquo;Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study&rdquo;

Ejemplares similares

Comments on the authors’ reply to the critical appraisal concerning “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study”