Last Thursday, we discussed the ground-breaking study that found non-physician Cath Lab personnel reporting more work-related musculoskeletal pain. Today we'll discuss editorial comments from Dr. James Goldstein in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology and explore ways to advocate and educate about work-related pain from procedures involving radiation in the Cath Lab.
More to come: this ground-breaking study shows that non-physician Cath Lab employees, ACVP members, are more likely to experience work-related pain. Stay tuned by subscribing to the ACVP blog via email with the option on the side bar. We'll bring you more information about the study and new technologies that might help you avoid radiation and pain in the Cath Lab.
Results of a survey released in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology showed that non-physician Cath Lab employees reported higher levels of musculoskeletal pain.
According to the study conducted via the Mayo Clinic Survey Center, factors association with increased work-related pain included
Continue reading Special Report (1): Non-Physician Cath Lab Personnel Report More Work-Related Pain
Pictured: Impella CP.
Cardiovascular technology has been all over financial news recently as Abiomed's Impella CP roll-out continued to be strong last quarter and their Impella RP (Right Percutaneous) system received FDA approval under a Humanitarian Device Exemption.
The Impella devices, tiny heart pumps introduced via catheter by the femoral artery, allow cardiovascular professionals to support the heart in a minimally invasive way, avoiding open heart surgery in many cases. The devices mark a significant advancement in cardiovascular treatment for patients with extreme surgical risk.
Continue reading Impella RP Approved, Impella CP Devices Continue Roll-Out
A new sub-study from the CoreValve U.S. Trial published in February's issue of JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions marks a step closer to a model for deciding what extreme surgical risk patients should NOT undergo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR).
While a majority of extreme-risk patients did see significant positive change in disease-specific, general health and quality-of-life metrics following TAVR, a large minority—39 percent of patients—had a poor outcome post-TAVR.