ASSESSING THE KNOWLEDGE OF NURSES REGARDING THE COMPLICATIONS AND MANAGEMENT OF TEMPORARY PACE MAKER CARDIAC DEVICES: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71000/kfj0pn97Keywords:
KNOWLEDGE , Age Factors, Cardiac Pacing, Artificial, Cross-Sectional Studies, Education, Nursing, Nurses, Patient SafetyAbstract
Background: Temporary cardiac pacemakers (TCPs) are essential, life-saving devices used to stabilize patients with conduction abnormalities, arrhythmias, or post-operative cardiac complications. Their management requires a high level of nursing competence to prevent adverse events such as lead dislodgement, pacing failure, or infection. Evidence has shown that nurses often demonstrate variability in knowledge and skills, with deficiencies concentrated in technical and complication-related areas. Structured assessment of knowledge is therefore crucial to guide targeted training interventions and improve patient safety in high-risk cardiac units.
Objective: To assess the knowledge of nurses regarding complications and management of temporary cardiac pacemaker devices in a tertiary cardiac care setting.
Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at the Punjab Institute of Cardiology, Lahore, between February and June 2025. A total of 169 registered nurses working in ICU, CCU, cath labs, and emergency departments were recruited through purposive sampling. Eligibility required at least one year of clinical experience. Data were collected using a structured 20-item questionnaire rated on a 5-point Likert scale (range: 20–100). Knowledge scores were categorized as poor (20–49), moderate (50–74), and good (75–100). Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25, with descriptive and inferential statistics including chi-square tests for subgroup comparisons. Ethical approval was obtained, and informed consent was secured from all participants.
Results: Out of 169 participants, 132 nurses (78.11%) demonstrated good knowledge, 36 (21.30%) had moderate knowledge, and 1 (0.59%) showed poor knowledge. Nurses with bachelor’s degrees performed significantly better than diploma holders (χ² = 7.98, p = 0.018). Although knowledge improved with greater experience and older age, these differences did not reach statistical significance. Item-wise analysis revealed highest scores in patient education (mean = 4.34), infection control (mean = 4.28), and confidence in care (mean = 4.34), while lowest scores were noted in pacing thresholds (mean = 3.80) and cardiac tamponade recognition (mean = 3.80).
Conclusion: Most nurses demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of temporary pacemaker management, yet important gaps persisted in technical and complication-related areas. The findings highlight the need for structured training and standardized protocols to enhance nursing competence, ensure patient safety, and improve outcomes in cardiac care units.
References
Baloch, N. R., Qamar, F., Fatima, R., & Shaikh, A. A. (2021). Nurses’ knowledge and practice regarding temporary pacemakers: An exploratory study. Egyptian Journal of Health Care, 14(1), 738–748.
Korejo, Z. A., Ali, A., Kumar, A., Khan, A., & Dahri, A. F. (2024). Evaluation of nurses' knowledge and performance related to patient safety following cardiac catheterization. Pakistan Journal of Health Sciences, 5(11)
Mahrous, K., Ismaeil, A., Nasr, M. H., & Mahrous, F. M. (2024). Nurses’ Performance for Patients with Implantable Cardiac Devices. 15(1).
Mohamed, M. S., Abd, O., Aty, E., Abd, A., & Abd, E. (2023). Nurses’ Performance Regarding Care of Temporary Pacemaker among Critically Ill Patient. 14(1), 738–748.
Stoyanova, I. A. (2024). The role of the nurse in patients with pacemakers: Practices and interventions in preoperative and postoperative intensive care. 23(03), 2764–2772.
Waqanivavalagi, S. W. F. R. (2024). Temporary pacing following cardiac surgery – a reference guide for surgical teams. Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, 19(1), 1–5.
Oliveira ES, Menezes TMO, Gomes NP, Oliveira LMS, Batista VM, Oliveira MCM, et al. Transitional care of nurses to older adults with artificial pacemaker. Rev Bras Enferm. 2021;75Suppl. 4(Suppl. 4):e20210192.
Adams A, Adams C. Transcutaneous Pacing: An Emergency Nurse's Guide. J Emerg Nurs. 2021;47(2):326-30.
Mette C, Prost D, Baud J, Taieb J, Marijon E, Piot O. Survey on the paramedical role in the remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices in France. Ann Cardiol Angeiol (Paris). 2023;72(3):101599.
Walker TJ, Bradbury A. A Primer on Pacemakers and Defibrillators for Nurses. Nurs Clin North Am. 2023;58(3):405-19.
Wan EY, Rogers AJ, Lavelle M, Marcus M, Stone SA, Ottoboni L, et al. Periprocedural Management and Multidisciplinary Care Pathways for Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2024;150(8):e183-e96.
Fraiche AM, Matlock DD, Gabriel W, Rapley FA, Kramer DB. Patient and Provider Perspectives on Remote Monitoring of Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators. Am J Cardiol. 2021;149:42-6.
Todd B. Nursing the Patient With an Artificial Pacemaker. Am J Nurs. 2022;122(6):50-2.
Palmisano P, Sergi C, Panico V, Chiarillo MV, Chiuri MD, Martella ML, et al. Impact on nurse workload and patient satisfaction of atrioventricular junction ablation performed simultaneously with conduction system pacing using a superior approach from the pocket compared with the conventional femoral approach. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2024;23(7):746-55.
Wilson-Stewart KS, Fontanarosa D, Malacova E, Trapp JV. Impact of dose reducing software on patient and staff temple dose during fluoroscopically guided pacemaker insertion, closure devices implantation and coronary angiography procedures. Phys Eng Sci Med. 2022;45(2):589-99.
Gatti P, Nymark C, Gadler F. Health-related quality of life in a large cohort of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices A registry-based study. PLoS One. 2024;19(12):e0314978.
Schrage B, Lund LH, Melin M, Benson L, Uijl A, Dahlström U, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without defibrillator in patients with heart failure. Europace. 2022;24(1):48-57.
van Stipdonk AMW, Schretlen S, Dohmen W, Knackstedt C, Beckers-Wesche F, Debie L, et al. Better outcome at lower costs after implementing a CRT-care pathway: comprehensive evaluation of real-world data. ESC Heart Fail. 2022;9(4):2518-27.
Sheahen B, O'Hagan ET, Cho K, Shaw T, Lee A, Lal S, et al. Barriers and Enablers to Routine Clinical Implementation of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Remote Monitoring in Australia Among Cardiologists, Cardiac Physiologists, Nurses, and Patients: Interview Study. JMIR Cardio. 2025;9:e67758.
Su SF, Wu MS. Arrhythmia Perception and Quality of Life in Bradyarrhythmia Patients Following Permanent Pacemaker Implantation. Clin Nurs Res. 2021;30(2):183-92.
Goodwin E, Fogelson B, Cox JW, Jr., Mahlow WJ. An algorithm for pacing and cardioverting electronic devices undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: The PACED-MRI protocol. Magn Reson Imaging. 2023;96:44-9.
Eftekhari H, He H, Lee JD, Paul G, Zhupaj A, Lachlan T, et al. Safety and outcome of nurse-led syncope clinics and implantable loop recorder implants. Heart Rhythm. 2022;19(3):443-7.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Arshia Nadeem, Maryam Mehboob, Sheharyar Ahmed (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
