
Start With the Why: Easing Fears of Cardiac Testing
During your assessment, if you determine that the patient has an irregular heartbeat, a family history of cardiac conditions, or believe further testing is warranted, realize that a patient could be fearful of cardiac testing. To ease the concerns of your patients, it's important to explain how such testing can diagnose the reason they aren't feeling quite right and how their treatment team can help them feel better.
Start With the Why
Leaving the trusted environment of a primary care office can be daunting for patients, particularly for those who haven't had cardiac testing before. But explaining why you're suggesting the tests can help a patient understand.
"The most important step would be to explain how cardiac testing can be important in order to screen for issues before they become serious," said David Weininger Cohen, MD, a cardiologist with the Leonard M. Miller School of Medicine at the University of Miami in Florida.
He also suggested recounting what symptoms patients are experiencing and how specific tests can investigate what's causing them. Also, explaining that some symptoms may not even be tied to cardiac issues could be another strategy to demonstrate the importance of further testing.
"For instance, chest pain is a symptom that becomes a common reason for visits. Most people usually associate chest pain with heart issues, but there are a lot of structures in the chest that can cause pain, not just the heart — cartilage, esophagus, sometimes part of the stomach, skin, and even nerve endings," he said. "Ultimately, cardiac testing is important because it allows the physician to discriminate between cardiac and non-cardiac causes for the patient's symptoms."
In addition, reassuring your patients that these experts can diagnose potential issues may also ease their worries, so articulate how such cardiac tests are performed in a controlled environment with trained staff that can anticipate issues and respond quickly if something goes wrong, Weininger Cohen added.
Understand Patients Are Fearful of Test Results
Some patients are afraid of the results as much as the test.
"In those cases, I like to reinforce why the test is necessary and why we're doing it," said Weininger Cohen. "Additionally, I sometimes go through the possible scenarios depending on the results of each test." Knowing what lies ahead, depending on what the test shows, can sometimes be reassuring — you're showing patients you know exactly what the next steps would be.
Treat Fears Patient by Patient
Although there are some general practice strategies to ease fear regarding cardiac testing, personalizing your approach is also important.
"The best way to tackle fear of cardiac testing would be to ask the patient exactly what they're afraid of," said Weininger Cohen. Some patients are going to be afraid of having pain or discomfort during the test. Some patients are afraid of what the results may be, and some patients are afraid of possible complications.
"Usually, the best way to approach the topic is to explain the reason for the test and then address the specific fear the patient has," he specified.
For example, the best way to describe an EKG would be to explain that it is a test that is trying to capture the electrical activity of the heart. To achieve that, the person performing it is putting sensors on different parts of the patient's body to detect the heart's electrical current from different points, he said. Emphasizing that the test is painless, and that it's just capturing the natural electrical activity of the heart, should put patients at ease.
How Can You Best Describe an Echocardiogram?
Most patients understand what an ultrasound is, so advising patients that an echocardiogram is simply an ultrasound study of the heart can calm fears. It may also be helpful to share that in some cases, ultrasounds use enhancing agents, referred to as contrast, to get a look at the different structures of the heart, he said.
Some patients could be concerned about radiation.
"Both tests are radiation free, and this is something that some patients are very interested in knowing before proceeding, especially if they have been previously exposed to radiation through other diagnostic imaging tests or radiotherapy for cancer treatment," Weininger Cohen said. Taking the time to explain both an echocardiogram and an EKG can help your patients understand what to expect and reduce worry and the fear of the unknown.
What to Tell Patients Before Referring to a Cardiologist
Referring a patient to a specialist like a cardiologist could cause fear. So explain why you're taking this step.
Mustafa M. Ahmed, MD
"Telling a patient why they need to see a heart expert and how they will add to their overall care can be a helpful first step," said Mustafa M. Ahmed, MD, a cardiologist and professor of medicine, who's also vice chief of research of the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine and medical director of the Mechanical Circulatory Support Program at the University of Florida in Gainesville. "Assuring them that they won't be losing their primary care doctor, but gaining a specialist to consult with both them and the primary care team, is often a good way to frame expectations."
Lifestyle Tweaks You Might Suggest
In the context of your discussions with patients regarding their symptoms and recommendations for cardiac testing, Ahmed suggested expressing how diet and exercise, as a part of overall lifestyle changes, can be the most impactful way to prevent heart disease.
"Gentle guidance and step-by-step encouragement are often helpful," he said.
Also, involving other family members and friends in that journey is another strategy. This may include taking walks, preparing meals together, or embracing a healthier mindset overall.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Washington Post
36 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Unhealthy smoke from Canadian wildfires blankets the Upper Midwest when people want to be outside
BISMARCK, N.D. — Much of the Upper Midwest on Saturday was dealing with swaths of unhealthy air due to drifting smoke from Canadian wildfires, covering the northern region of the U.S. at a time when people want to be enjoying lakes, trails and the great outdoors. Most of Minnesota and parts of Montana, North Dakota and Wisconsin were ranked 'unhealthy' for air quality on a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency map. Part of North Dakota that is home to Theodore Roosevelt National Park and other tourist attractions was ranked 'very unhealthy,' some of the worst air quality in the nation.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
New Mexico sues US air force over Pfas pollution from military base
The state of New Mexico is suing the US air force over its refusal to comply with orders to address extremely high levels of Pfas pollution stemming from its base, which has tainted drinking water for tens of thousands of people, damaged crops and poisoned dairy cows. Though the military acknowledges Pfas-laden firefighting foam from Cannon air force base is the source of a four mile chemical plume in the aquifer below Clovis, New Mexico, it has refused to comply with most state orders to address the issue. The new lawsuit filed by the state's justice and environmental departments is the latest salvo in the seven-year battle over the pollution, and comes after changes to state law that strengthened New Mexico's legal position. Related: Landmark US study reveals sewage sludge and wastewater plants tied to Pfas pollution The air force's inaction has forced state taxpayers to shoulder the cost, and the plume has 'become a ward of the state', said James Kenney, secretary of the New Mexico environment department. 'They've managed to litigate against the state, they've allowed the plume to go unchecked, and in the mind of the state and much of the community, they've done nothing of substance,' Kenney added. Pfas are a class of about 15,000 compounds most frequently used to make products water-, stain- and grease-resistant. They have been linked to cancer, birth defects, decreased immunity, high cholesterol, kidney disease and a range of other serious health problems. They are dubbed 'forever chemicals' because they do not naturally break down in the environment. Pfas are a common ingredient in firefighting foam, and the military is in the process of phasing it out because the highly toxic substance has widely contaminated water and the environment around over 700 bases nationwide. In 2018, Cannon's Pfas was found to have poisoned drinking water for over 100 private wells, and has so far taken out one municipal well that serves Clovis, a city of 40,000 people. Levels found in surface water were about 27,000 times higher than US Environmental Protection Agency drinking water limits. The pollution also continues to contaminate thousands of acres of crops that rely on the aquifer for water, raising questions about the safety of those products. Local dairy farmers in 2018 were forced to euthanize about 3,500 cows that had contaminated milk. In August, another 7,000 gallons of Pfas-contaminated wastewater leaked from an air force pond into groundwater, but the air force has refused to pay a $70,000 state fine. The air force in a statement told the Guardian it does not comment on active litigation. In 2019, New Mexico issued a corrective action permit that stipulated how it should remediate the plume. The air force then sued New Mexico in federal court, alleging that the Pfas foam is not a hazardous substance, and the state lacked the authority to make the order. That awaits an opinion from a federal court. The New Mexico legislature designated the Pfas-laden foam as a hazardous substance under state law in response. The new suit, in state court, asks a judge to order the air force to provide water treatment systems to affected residents, or connect those whose wells are contaminated to municipal sources. It also calls for pollution controls around the base and compensation for those whose property has been affected, among other measures. The nation's hazardous waste laws allow states to establish requirements for substances like Pfas and firefighting foam. The US Department of Justice and the air force's refusal to clean up the waste is essentially 'flipping the bird' at US law, Kenney said. The air force has provided filtration systems for some homes with the highest levels of Pfas, but it has not maintained the systems, nor has it provided any for agriculture. The military has not gone far enough, Kenney said. 'If they contaminated people's drinking and agricultural water … and they're litigating instead of remediating, then we can't sit back and say they're doing the right thing,' Kenney added. Cannon is not isolated, and the air force has received criticism for slow responses to pollution around the country. After years of resisting orders to address Pfas from a base in Tucson, Arizona, that threatened the city's drinking water, the air force late last year agreed to fund new filtration systems. Congress has made around $3bn of funding available annually for Pfas remediation at military bases, but the air force often still 'slow rolls' the work, said Jared Hayes, senior policy analyst with the Environmental Working Group nonprofit, which tracks military Pfas pollution. He noted the air force's remedial investigation of the New Mexico plume is not due until the end of 2026. 'We've seen similar situations across the country where the air force is generally dragging its feet when it comes to cleaning up Pfas pollution,' Hayes said. 'Communities in New Hampshire, Michigan, Arizona, New Mexico are waiting and waiting for cleanup, but it's still a long way off.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Planned Parenthood offices begin rejecting Medicaid after Trump signs bill to defund healthcare organization
At least two regional Planned Parenthood affiliates have notices on their websites telling patients that, thanks to a provision in Republicans' new tax-and-spending bill that 'defunds' the reproductive healthcare giant, they can no longer accept Medicaid. However, this provision – which abortion rights supporters have called a 'backdoor abortion ban' – was recently blocked by a court order. Other Planned Parenthood affiliates are continuing to treat patients who use Medicaid to pay for treatment. Although the Planned Parenthood network is overseen by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, it includes dozens of independent affiliates that directly provide care to patients. As of Wednesday afternoon, Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington DC and Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains had notices on their websites alerting patients that they can no longer accept Medicaid, the US government's insurance program for low-income people. 'With the passage of the reconciliation bill into law on July 4, 2025, Planned Parenthood health centers, including Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington, DC (PPMW) centers, can no longer accept Medicaid coverage for care,' reads the statement on Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington DC's website, which lists a number of ways patients can still find funding for care. 'This 'defund' provision is a cruel, harmful, and inhumane law that will strip health care from thousands of people in the DC metropolitan region and millions across the country.' Neither Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington DC nor Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains immediately responded to a request for comment. 'There are no other providers who can fully meet the needs of millions of patients if the 'defunding' of Planned Parenthood is allowed to stand,' Danika Severino Wynn, vice-president of care and access at the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement. 'Planned Parenthood health centers are committed to doing everything they can to still see patients – and will continue to do so – while complying with all laws amid the chaos, cruelty and confusion intentionally sown by the new law the Trump administration and its backers in Congress passed that seeks to shut down Planned Parenthood and ban abortion nationwide.' Some of these affiliates' notices were initially flagged by reporter Susan Rinkunas of Autonomy News, an outlet that covers issues related to bodily autonomy. On 4 July, Donald Trump signed into law a sprawling tax-and-spending bill that, in addition to directing trillions of dollars towards tax cuts and immigration enforcement, blocks Planned Parenthood affiliates from receiving Medicaid funding for at least one year. This ban, which fulfills conservatives' long-running pledge to 'defund' Planned Parenthood, would force the organization to close roughly 200 health centers. Blue states, which are home to larger numbers of Medicaid beneficiaries, would probably take a disproportionate hit. Planned Parenthood sued over the 'defunding' provision on Monday, claiming that it violates the US constitution in multiple ways. A judge agreed to freeze the defunding provision for at least two weeks. A spokesperson for another affiliate, Planned Parenthood of Florida, confirmed that, after the judge's order, the group was again scheduling patients who rely on Medicaid. Related: Planned Parenthood sues Trump administration over funding cuts in big bill 'Over the weekend, we had to cancel appointments for patients that used Medicaid coverage to receive care at our health centers, which was an incredibly painful and stressful process for the patients and the staff,' said Michelle Quesada, vice-president of communications for Planned Parenthood of Florida. 'It's a rapidly changing situation.' Since it is illegal to use Medicaid to pay for the vast majority of abortions, Planned Parenthood clinics rely on the insurance program to reimburse them for providing services like birth control, STI tests and cancer screenings. About one in 10 female Medicaid beneficiaries between the ages of 15 and 49 go to Planned Parenthood for their family-planning services. 'We're facing a reality of the impact on shutting down almost half of abortion-providing health centers,' Alexis McGill Johnson, Planned Parenthood Federation of Americas's CEO, told the Guardian last week. 'It does feel existential. Not just for Planned Parenthood, but for communities that are relying on access to this care.'