Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death

Background  Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD. Design/Se...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 2013-03, Vol.16 (1), p.69-79
Hauptverfasser: Carroll, Sandra L., Strachan, Patricia H., de Laat, Sonya, Schwartz, Lisa, Arthur, Heather M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 79
container_issue 1
container_start_page 69
container_title Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy
container_volume 16
creator Carroll, Sandra L.
Strachan, Patricia H.
de Laat, Sonya
Schwartz, Lisa
Arthur, Heather M.
description Background  Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD. Design/Setting  A grounded theory methodology was employed. Patients were recruited from three ICD centres. Those who received an ICD underwent interviews the first month after implant. Declining patients had interviews at their convenience. In‐depth analysis of transcripts was completed. Identified themes were placed along process pathways in a DMP model and tested. Findings  Forty‐four patients consented to participate (25% women). Thirty‐four accepted an ICD and 10 (23%) declined. Ages ranged from 26 to 87 (mean = 65; SD = 12.5). Participants were retired (65%), had ischaemic heart disease (64%) and some post‐secondary education (52%). The DMP was triggered when patient’s risk for SCD was communicated. The physician’s recommendation and a new awareness SCD risk were motivators to accept the ICD. Patient’s decision‐making approaches fell along a continuum, from active and engaged to passive and indifferent. Patient’s approaches were influenced most by the following: (i) trust; (ii) social influences and (iii) health state. Conclusions  Health‐care providers need to recognize the DMP pathways in which ICD candidacy and SCD risk are understood. The factors that influence a patient’s decision warrant discussion pre‐implant. It is imperative that patients comprehend the meaning of ICD candidacy to make an informed decision. Participants did not recall alternatives to receiving ICD therapy.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00703.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_24P</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3380066</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1315612698</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5673-3403cb9bed862d2a20f18f188ea4ebdd1b5d212424ad96f66268741831de290f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNks-K1TAUxoMozjj6ChJw4-bW_GnTFESQYXSEAV0ouAtpcjqTa5tck_Q6s3PrI_h6Pomp93pRN05pSeD8vi8npx9CmJKKlufZuqJcdKtWsKZihNKKkJbw6voOOj4U7u73oqH8CD1IaU0Ibbls76MjRkXd0I4co2_vdHbgc_rx9Tu2YFxyweNJf3L-EueAtTGwyTjEpTg6D1h77KbNqH3W_QjY6Ghd2ELMsDCD66MbR52LYijfJrpJx5uywrYcs5iHAafZWvA7rTZFpvPVQ3Rv0GOCR_v1BH14dfb-9Hx18fb1m9OXFyvTiJaveE246bserBTMMs3IQGV5Jegaemtp31hGWc1qbTsxCMGEbGsqObXAOjLwE_Ri57uZ-wmsKV1FPap9oypop_6ueHelLsNWcS4JEaIYPN0bxPB5hpTV5JKBcmkPYU6qTL1uRc07eguUNoIy0cn_o0w2RHLSsoI--Qddhzn6MjTFiSj_nvBmoeSOMjGkFGE4XJEStaRIrZdWO7WERS0pUr9SpK6L9PGfIzoIf8emAM93wBc3ws2tjdX52cey4T8Bx4DYjQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3067620352</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</source><creator>Carroll, Sandra L. ; Strachan, Patricia H. ; de Laat, Sonya ; Schwartz, Lisa ; Arthur, Heather M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Sandra L. ; Strachan, Patricia H. ; de Laat, Sonya ; Schwartz, Lisa ; Arthur, Heather M.</creatorcontrib><description>Background  Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD. Design/Setting  A grounded theory methodology was employed. Patients were recruited from three ICD centres. Those who received an ICD underwent interviews the first month after implant. Declining patients had interviews at their convenience. In‐depth analysis of transcripts was completed. Identified themes were placed along process pathways in a DMP model and tested. Findings  Forty‐four patients consented to participate (25% women). Thirty‐four accepted an ICD and 10 (23%) declined. Ages ranged from 26 to 87 (mean = 65; SD = 12.5). Participants were retired (65%), had ischaemic heart disease (64%) and some post‐secondary education (52%). The DMP was triggered when patient’s risk for SCD was communicated. The physician’s recommendation and a new awareness SCD risk were motivators to accept the ICD. Patient’s decision‐making approaches fell along a continuum, from active and engaged to passive and indifferent. Patient’s approaches were influenced most by the following: (i) trust; (ii) social influences and (iii) health state. Conclusions  Health‐care providers need to recognize the DMP pathways in which ICD candidacy and SCD risk are understood. The factors that influence a patient’s decision warrant discussion pre‐implant. It is imperative that patients comprehend the meaning of ICD candidacy to make an informed decision. Participants did not recall alternatives to receiving ICD therapy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1369-6513</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1369-7625</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00703.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21645190</identifier><identifier>CODEN: HEHPFM</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Alternative medicine ; Candidates ; Cardiac arrhythmia ; Cardiology ; cardiovascular ; Cardiovascular diseases ; Coronary artery disease ; Death ; Death &amp; dying ; Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention &amp; control ; Decision Making ; Defibrillators ; Defibrillators, Implantable - psychology ; Defibrillators, Implantable - utilization ; Female ; Grounded theory ; Health care ; Health Status ; Heart diseases ; Heart failure ; Higher education ; Humans ; implantable defibrillator ; Implants ; Influence ; Interviews ; Interviews as Topic ; Ischemia ; Male ; Medical personnel ; Medicine ; Middle Aged ; Motivation ; Original Research Papers ; Patient Acceptance of Health Care - psychology ; patient decision making ; Patient Preference - psychology ; patient values ; Patients ; Prevention ; primary prevention ; Qualitative research ; Risk acceptance ; Risk communication ; Risk Factors ; Secondary education ; Social sciences ; sudden cardiac death ; Sudden death ; Task forces ; Thoracic surgery ; Trust ; Women</subject><ispartof>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2013-03, Vol.16 (1), p.69-79</ispartof><rights>2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</rights><rights>2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.</rights><rights>2013. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5673-3403cb9bed862d2a20f18f188ea4ebdd1b5d212424ad96f66268741831de290f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5673-3403cb9bed862d2a20f18f188ea4ebdd1b5d212424ad96f66268741831de290f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3380066/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3380066/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,1417,11562,27924,27925,30999,31000,45574,45575,46052,46476,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fj.1369-7625.2011.00703.x$$EView_record_in_Wiley-Blackwell$$FView_record_in_$$GWiley-Blackwell</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21645190$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Sandra L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strachan, Patricia H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Laat, Sonya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arthur, Heather M.</creatorcontrib><title>Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death</title><title>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</title><addtitle>Health Expect</addtitle><description>Background  Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD. Design/Setting  A grounded theory methodology was employed. Patients were recruited from three ICD centres. Those who received an ICD underwent interviews the first month after implant. Declining patients had interviews at their convenience. In‐depth analysis of transcripts was completed. Identified themes were placed along process pathways in a DMP model and tested. Findings  Forty‐four patients consented to participate (25% women). Thirty‐four accepted an ICD and 10 (23%) declined. Ages ranged from 26 to 87 (mean = 65; SD = 12.5). Participants were retired (65%), had ischaemic heart disease (64%) and some post‐secondary education (52%). The DMP was triggered when patient’s risk for SCD was communicated. The physician’s recommendation and a new awareness SCD risk were motivators to accept the ICD. Patient’s decision‐making approaches fell along a continuum, from active and engaged to passive and indifferent. Patient’s approaches were influenced most by the following: (i) trust; (ii) social influences and (iii) health state. Conclusions  Health‐care providers need to recognize the DMP pathways in which ICD candidacy and SCD risk are understood. The factors that influence a patient’s decision warrant discussion pre‐implant. It is imperative that patients comprehend the meaning of ICD candidacy to make an informed decision. Participants did not recall alternatives to receiving ICD therapy.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Alternative medicine</subject><subject>Candidates</subject><subject>Cardiac arrhythmia</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>cardiovascular</subject><subject>Cardiovascular diseases</subject><subject>Coronary artery disease</subject><subject>Death</subject><subject>Death &amp; dying</subject><subject>Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Defibrillators</subject><subject>Defibrillators, Implantable - psychology</subject><subject>Defibrillators, Implantable - utilization</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Grounded theory</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health Status</subject><subject>Heart diseases</subject><subject>Heart failure</subject><subject>Higher education</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>implantable defibrillator</subject><subject>Implants</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Interviews as Topic</subject><subject>Ischemia</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Original Research Papers</subject><subject>Patient Acceptance of Health Care - psychology</subject><subject>patient decision making</subject><subject>Patient Preference - psychology</subject><subject>patient values</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>primary prevention</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Risk acceptance</subject><subject>Risk communication</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Secondary education</subject><subject>Social sciences</subject><subject>sudden cardiac death</subject><subject>Sudden death</subject><subject>Task forces</subject><subject>Thoracic surgery</subject><subject>Trust</subject><subject>Women</subject><issn>1369-6513</issn><issn>1369-7625</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNks-K1TAUxoMozjj6ChJw4-bW_GnTFESQYXSEAV0ouAtpcjqTa5tck_Q6s3PrI_h6Pomp93pRN05pSeD8vi8npx9CmJKKlufZuqJcdKtWsKZihNKKkJbw6voOOj4U7u73oqH8CD1IaU0Ibbls76MjRkXd0I4co2_vdHbgc_rx9Tu2YFxyweNJf3L-EueAtTGwyTjEpTg6D1h77KbNqH3W_QjY6Ghd2ELMsDCD66MbR52LYijfJrpJx5uywrYcs5iHAafZWvA7rTZFpvPVQ3Rv0GOCR_v1BH14dfb-9Hx18fb1m9OXFyvTiJaveE246bserBTMMs3IQGV5Jegaemtp31hGWc1qbTsxCMGEbGsqObXAOjLwE_Ri57uZ-wmsKV1FPap9oypop_6ueHelLsNWcS4JEaIYPN0bxPB5hpTV5JKBcmkPYU6qTL1uRc07eguUNoIy0cn_o0w2RHLSsoI--Qddhzn6MjTFiSj_nvBmoeSOMjGkFGE4XJEStaRIrZdWO7WERS0pUr9SpK6L9PGfIzoIf8emAM93wBc3ws2tjdX52cey4T8Bx4DYjQ</recordid><startdate>201303</startdate><enddate>201303</enddate><creator>Carroll, Sandra L.</creator><creator>Strachan, Patricia H.</creator><creator>de Laat, Sonya</creator><creator>Schwartz, Lisa</creator><creator>Arthur, Heather M.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201303</creationdate><title>Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death</title><author>Carroll, Sandra L. ; Strachan, Patricia H. ; de Laat, Sonya ; Schwartz, Lisa ; Arthur, Heather M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5673-3403cb9bed862d2a20f18f188ea4ebdd1b5d212424ad96f66268741831de290f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Alternative medicine</topic><topic>Candidates</topic><topic>Cardiac arrhythmia</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>cardiovascular</topic><topic>Cardiovascular diseases</topic><topic>Coronary artery disease</topic><topic>Death</topic><topic>Death &amp; dying</topic><topic>Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Defibrillators</topic><topic>Defibrillators, Implantable - psychology</topic><topic>Defibrillators, Implantable - utilization</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Grounded theory</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health Status</topic><topic>Heart diseases</topic><topic>Heart failure</topic><topic>Higher education</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>implantable defibrillator</topic><topic>Implants</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Interviews as Topic</topic><topic>Ischemia</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Original Research Papers</topic><topic>Patient Acceptance of Health Care - psychology</topic><topic>patient decision making</topic><topic>Patient Preference - psychology</topic><topic>patient values</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>primary prevention</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Risk acceptance</topic><topic>Risk communication</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Secondary education</topic><topic>Social sciences</topic><topic>sudden cardiac death</topic><topic>Sudden death</topic><topic>Task forces</topic><topic>Thoracic surgery</topic><topic>Trust</topic><topic>Women</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Sandra L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strachan, Patricia H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Laat, Sonya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arthur, Heather M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carroll, Sandra L.</au><au>Strachan, Patricia H.</au><au>de Laat, Sonya</au><au>Schwartz, Lisa</au><au>Arthur, Heather M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death</atitle><jtitle>Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy</jtitle><addtitle>Health Expect</addtitle><date>2013-03</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>69</spage><epage>79</epage><pages>69-79</pages><issn>1369-6513</issn><eissn>1369-7625</eissn><coden>HEHPFM</coden><abstract>Background  Patients are offered implantable defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, patients’ decision‐making process (DMP) of whether or not to accept an ICD has not been explored. We asked patients about their decision making when offered an ICD. Design/Setting  A grounded theory methodology was employed. Patients were recruited from three ICD centres. Those who received an ICD underwent interviews the first month after implant. Declining patients had interviews at their convenience. In‐depth analysis of transcripts was completed. Identified themes were placed along process pathways in a DMP model and tested. Findings  Forty‐four patients consented to participate (25% women). Thirty‐four accepted an ICD and 10 (23%) declined. Ages ranged from 26 to 87 (mean = 65; SD = 12.5). Participants were retired (65%), had ischaemic heart disease (64%) and some post‐secondary education (52%). The DMP was triggered when patient’s risk for SCD was communicated. The physician’s recommendation and a new awareness SCD risk were motivators to accept the ICD. Patient’s decision‐making approaches fell along a continuum, from active and engaged to passive and indifferent. Patient’s approaches were influenced most by the following: (i) trust; (ii) social influences and (iii) health state. Conclusions  Health‐care providers need to recognize the DMP pathways in which ICD candidacy and SCD risk are understood. The factors that influence a patient’s decision warrant discussion pre‐implant. It is imperative that patients comprehend the meaning of ICD candidacy to make an informed decision. Participants did not recall alternatives to receiving ICD therapy.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>21645190</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00703.x</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISSN: 1369-6513
ispartof Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2013-03, Vol.16 (1), p.69-79
issn 1369-6513
1369-7625
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3380066
source Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles
subjects Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Alternative medicine
Candidates
Cardiac arrhythmia
Cardiology
cardiovascular
Cardiovascular diseases
Coronary artery disease
Death
Death & dying
Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control
Decision Making
Defibrillators
Defibrillators, Implantable - psychology
Defibrillators, Implantable - utilization
Female
Grounded theory
Health care
Health Status
Heart diseases
Heart failure
Higher education
Humans
implantable defibrillator
Implants
Influence
Interviews
Interviews as Topic
Ischemia
Male
Medical personnel
Medicine
Middle Aged
Motivation
Original Research Papers
Patient Acceptance of Health Care - psychology
patient decision making
Patient Preference - psychology
patient values
Patients
Prevention
primary prevention
Qualitative research
Risk acceptance
Risk communication
Risk Factors
Secondary education
Social sciences
sudden cardiac death
Sudden death
Task forces
Thoracic surgery
Trust
Women
title Patients’ decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T08%3A43%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_24P&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patients%E2%80%99%20decision%20making%20to%20accept%20or%20decline%20an%20implantable%20cardioverter%20defibrillator%20for%20primary%20prevention%20of%20sudden%20cardiac%20death&rft.jtitle=Health%20expectations%20:%20an%20international%20journal%20of%20public%20participation%20in%20health%20care%20and%20health%20policy&rft.au=Carroll,%20Sandra%20L.&rft.date=2013-03&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=69&rft.epage=79&rft.pages=69-79&rft.issn=1369-6513&rft.eissn=1369-7625&rft.coden=HEHPFM&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00703.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_24P%3E1315612698%3C/proquest_24P%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3067620352&rft_id=info:pmid/21645190&rfr_iscdi=true