English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Background  Although cardiac implantable electronic device ( CIED ) implantation is considered to be minor surgery, almost 60% of the patients suffer from shoulder‐related problems a short time after the procedure. The purpose of this study was to determine the possible effects of the preference of the dominant side for  CIED  implantation on the ipsilateral superior extremity functions.    Methods  The study included a total of 107 patients who had been living with a  CIED  for >6 months. Patients were separated into two groups according to the dominant hand and side of the  CIED . The ipsilateral dominant‐hand group comprised those with a  CIED  on the same side as the dominant hand and the contralateral dominant‐hand group included patients with the  CIED  placed on the contralateral side to the dominant hand. Visual analogue scale ( VAS ) pain score, quick disability of the arm shoulder and hand questionnaire (Quick DASH ) and maximum isometric grip strength tests were used to evaluate the upper extremity disabilities.    Results  No significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of  VAS  pain scores ( P  = 0.10), Quick DASH  scores ( P  = 0.21), and limitations of the shoulder joint range of motion ( P  = 0.192). The maximum isometric grip strength was significantly different in the right hands between two groups (34 [16‐95]‐40 [24‐85]) ( P  = 0.02).    Conclusion  The present study shows that the joint range of motion limitation, pain, and disability of the upper extremity were no different in the affected arm compared to the healthy contralateral side with respect to the placement of the  CIED  on the dominant or non‐dominant side.

The effect on upper extremity functions of cardiac electronic device placement on the dominant hand side