CIED Post-OR Rehabilitation
Construction of a Postoperative Upper Limb Rehabilitation Exercise System With Transvenous Leads for CIED Implantation and Its Safety and Effectiveness Verification
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: ziqing yu, PhD
- Phone Number: 64041990
- Email: yu.ziqing@zs-hospital.sh.cn
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria
- Patients who meet the indications for transvenous CIEDs implantation in accordance with ACC/AHA/HRS or ESC guidelines, including single-chamber, dual-chamber, and triple-chamber pacemakers;
- Patients who have previously implanted a transvenous pacemaker and plan to upgrade the pacemaker requiring the addition of electrode leads;
- Patients aged > 18 years at the time of enrollment;
- The subject (or the patient's legal authorized representative) is willing and able to sign their name and date on the patient informed consent form.
Exclusion Criteria
- Subjects aged ≤ 18 years old, pregnant women or lactating patients;
- Patients with disease conditions that the researcher deems inappropriate for participation in this study;
- Patients who have previously implanted a transvenous pacemaker and only need to replace the pulse generator;
- Patients who are simultaneously participating in other clinical studies related to cardiac electronic implantable devices.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Prevention
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: rehabilitation guidance
systematic rehabilitation exercise program (rehabilitation exercise routine), focusing on the rehabilitation training of the upper limb on the implantation side after transvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implantation, and to explore its impact on the joint function of the implanted upper limb and the overall quality of life of patients.
|
a systematic rehabilitation exercise program (rehabilitation exercise routine)
|
|
Active Comparator: regular postoperative guidance
|
regular guidance
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in shoulder joint range of motion of the implanted upper limb after rehabilitation exercise intervention
Time Frame: 3-month follow-up (compared with baseline preoperative data)
|
Outcome Measure: Change in shoulder joint range of motion of the implanted upper limb after rehabilitation exercise intervention Unit of Measure: Degrees (°) (difference between follow-up and baseline) Time Frame: 3-month follow-up (compared with baseline preoperative data) |
3-month follow-up (compared with baseline preoperative data)
|
|
Major safety endpoint - Composite of severe rehabilitation-related complications
Time Frame: Through 12-month follow-up (from postoperative day 1 to 12-month follow-up)
|
Description: Severe complications related to rehabilitation exercise, including lead dislodgement caused by improper exercise, severe muscle strain, and joint dislocation of the implanted upper limb Unit of Measure: Percentage (%) Time Frame: Through 12-month follow-up (from postoperative day 1 to 12-month follow-up) |
Through 12-month follow-up (from postoperative day 1 to 12-month follow-up)
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in upper limb functional ability of the implanted upper limb
Time Frame: 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data)
|
Assessment Tool: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) Scale Details: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (DASH); minimum score = 0, maximum score = 100; higher scores indicate worse upper limb function Unit of Measure: Score (0-100) (difference between follow-up and baseline) Time Frame:1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data) |
1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data)
|
|
Change in pain level of the implanted upper limb
Time Frame: Immediate postoperative (within 24 hours), 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data)
|
Assessment Tool: Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Scale Details: Visual Analog Scale (VAS); minimum score = 0 (no pain), maximum score = 10 (severe pain); higher scores indicate more severe pain Unit of Measure: Score (0-10) (difference between follow-up and baseline) Time Frame: Immediate postoperative (within 24 hours), 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data) |
Immediate postoperative (within 24 hours), 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data)
|
|
Change in quality of life
Time Frame: 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data)
|
Assessment Tool: 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Scale Details: 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36); each domain score ranges from 0 to 100, total score ranges from 0 to 100; higher scores indicate better quality of life Unit of Measure: Score (0-100) (difference between follow-up and baseline) Time Frame: 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data) |
1-month, 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 12-month follow-up (each compared with baseline preoperative data)
|
|
Minor safety endpoint - Incidence of rehabilitation-related adverse events
Time Frame: Through 12-month follow-up (from postoperative day 1 to 12-month follow-up)
|
Minor adverse events related to rehabilitation exercise, including mild muscle soreness, local discomfort at the implantation site during exercise, and transient fatigue Unit of Measure: Percentage (%) Time Frame: Through 12-month follow-up (from postoperative day 1 to 12-month follow-up) |
Through 12-month follow-up (from postoperative day 1 to 12-month follow-up)
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- 1. Mond HG, Proclemer A. The 11th world survey of cardiac pacing and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: calendar year 2009--a World Society of Arrhythmia's project. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011;34(8):1013-27. 2. Burri H, Starck C, Auricchio A, Biffi M, Burri M, D'Avila A, et al. EHRA expert consensus statement and practical guide on optimal implantation technique for conventional pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and the Latin-American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). Europace. 2021;23(7):983-1008. 3. Daniels JD, Sun S, Zafereo J, Minhajuddin A, Nguyen C, Obel O, et al. Preventing shoulder pain after cardiac rhythm management device implantation: a randomized, controlled study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011;34(6):672-8. 4. Cook KF, Roddey TS, Olson SL, Gartsman GM, Valenzuela FF, Hanten WP. Reliability by surgical status of self-reported outcomes in patients who have shoulder pathologies. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2002;32(7):336-46. 5. Michener LA, McClure PW, Sennett BJ. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(6):587-94. 6. Beaton DE, Richards RR. Measuring function of the shoulder. A cross-sectional comparison of five questionnaires. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78(6):882-90. 7. Hollinshead RM, Mohtadi NG, Vande Guchte RA, Wadey VM. Two 6-year follow-up studies of large and massive rotator cuff tears: comparison of outcome measures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2000;9(5):373-81. 8. Razmjou H, Bean A, van Osnabrugge V, MacDermid JC, Holtby R. Cross-sectional and longitudinal construct validity of two rotator cuff disease-specific outcome measures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7:26. 9. Wongcharoen W, Petvipusit W, Prasertwitayakij N, Gunaparn S, Meemajam S, Pisespongsa C, et al. Effect of early pendulum exercise o
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- CIEDrehabilitation2025
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.