Management of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in End-of-Life Care

Published in: Annals of Internal Medicine, v. 141, no. 11, Dec. 7, 2004, p. 835-838, W-155

by Nathan E. Goldstein, Rachel Lampert, Elizabeth Bradley, Joanne Lynn, Harlan M. Krumholz

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) can prevent premature death from an arrhythmia but may also prolong the dying process and make it more distressing. OBJECTIVE: To describe the frequency, timing, and correlates of discussions about deactivating ICDs. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Telephone survey. PARTICIPANTS: Next of kin of patients with ICDs who died of any cause. Of 136 next of kin contacted, 100 (74%) participated. MEASUREMENTS: Incidence of discussions about deactivating ICDs and timing of last shock from ICD. RESULTS: Next of kin reported that clinicians discussed deactivating the ICD in only 27 of the 100 cases. Most discussions occurred in the last few days of life. Family members reported that 8 patients received a shock from their ICD in the minutes before death. LIMITATIONS: This retrospective survey relied on the reports of next of kin. CONCLUSIONS: Next of kin reported that clinicians discussed deactivating ICDs with few patients. Individuals who choose to receive this device should have the opportunity to choose to discontinue it as death approaches.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.