Summary: | 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 Eric 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; 6Institute for Applied Health Services Research, inav – privates Institut für angewandte Versorgungsforschung GmbH, Berlin, GermanyWe read with great interest the article “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study” by Ettinger et al. The authors conclude that wearable cardioverter defibrillators (WCDs) seem to be fairly safe in the short-to-medium term, but the quality of the available evidence is low. They also state that – according to their study inclusion criteria – they were not able to identify studies to assess the clinical effectiveness of the WCD. Given the importance of WCD for its target population and considering our clinical expertise, we see a particular need to clarify some points of this article.Author's ReplySabine Ettinger,1 Michal Stanak,1 Piotr Szymański,2 Claudia Wild,1 Romana Tandara Haček,3 Darija Erčević,3 Renata Grenković,3 Mirjana Huić31Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Health Technology Assessment, Vienna, Austria; 2Institute of Cardiology, Warsaw, Poland; 3Department for Development, Research and Health Technology Assessment, Agency for Quality and Accreditation in Health Care and Social Welfare, Zagreb, CroatiaWe read the letter to the editor with regard to our published paper on “Wearable cardioverter defibrillators for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest: a health technology assessment and patient focus group study” and gladly take the opportunity to appropriately address and clarify the issues that were raised. View the original paper by Ettinger and colleagues.
|