European journal of cardiovascular nursing · 2024
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.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Palmisano Pietro, Sergi Cesario, Panico Vincenzo, Chiarillo Marco Valerio, Chiuri Maria Domenica, Martella Maria Lucia, Stefanelli Gianluca, Martella Deborah, Mauro Raffaele, Ponzetta Maria Antonietta, Parlavecchio Antonio, Accogli Michele, Coluccia Giovanni
Аннотация
AIMS: Conduction system pacing (CSP) and atrioventricular junction ablation (AVJA) improve outcomes in patients with symptomatic, refractory atrial fibrillation (AF). Superior approach (SA) from the pocket, via the axillary or subclavian vein, has been recently proposed as an alternative to the conventional femoral access (FA) to perform AVJA. In this study, we compare the impact of these alternative approaches on nurse workload (NWL) and patient satisfaction.
METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective, observational study enrolling consecutive patients undergoing simultaneous CSP and AVJA. Electrophysiology laboratory (EP Lab) NWL was calculated by using a self-developed model. Ward NWL was calculated using the MIDENF® validated scale. Patient satisfaction was collected using the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Provider Systems questionnaire. A total of 119 patients were enrolled: in 50, AVJA was primarily attempted with SA, and in 69 with FA. Compared with FA, SA was associated with a lower EP Lab NWL (169.8 ± 26.7 vs. 202.7 ± 38.9 min; P < 0.001) and a lower Ward NWL (474.5 ± 184.8 vs. 808.6 ± 289.9 min; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis identified SA as an independent predictor of lower EP Lab NWL [hazard ratio (HR) 4.60; P = 0.001] and of lower Ward NWL (HR 45.13; P < 0.001). Compared with FA, SA was associated with a higher patient-reported rating regarding their experience during hospital stay (P = 0.035) and the overall hospital evaluation (P = 0.026).
CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing simultaneous CSP and AVJA, the use of an SA for ablation is a valid alternative to conventional FA. Compared with FA, this approach significantly reduces NWL and is associated with greater patient satisfaction.
REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03612635.
METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective, observational study enrolling consecutive patients undergoing simultaneous CSP and AVJA. Electrophysiology laboratory (EP Lab) NWL was calculated by using a self-developed model. Ward NWL was calculated using the MIDENF® validated scale. Patient satisfaction was collected using the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Provider Systems questionnaire. A total of 119 patients were enrolled: in 50, AVJA was primarily attempted with SA, and in 69 with FA. Compared with FA, SA was associated with a lower EP Lab NWL (169.8 ± 26.7 vs. 202.7 ± 38.9 min; P < 0.001) and a lower Ward NWL (474.5 ± 184.8 vs. 808.6 ± 289.9 min; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis identified SA as an independent predictor of lower EP Lab NWL [hazard ratio (HR) 4.60; P = 0.001] and of lower Ward NWL (HR 45.13; P < 0.001). Compared with FA, SA was associated with a higher patient-reported rating regarding their experience during hospital stay (P = 0.035) and the overall hospital evaluation (P = 0.026).
CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing simultaneous CSP and AVJA, the use of an SA for ablation is a valid alternative to conventional FA. Compared with FA, this approach significantly reduces NWL and is associated with greater patient satisfaction.
REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03612635.