Scholarlink

Objective <p>This study aimed to evaluate the consistency between the patients’ recurrent risk perception and APPLE-estimated recurrence risk after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and to investigate the factors possibly contributing to the inconsistency between them.</p> Methods <p>This study included 210 hospitalized patients who underwent AF ablation in the cardiology departments of two tertiary care hospitals in Qingdao. We utilized a single question to measure AF recurrence risk perception of the participants; and the APPLE score served as a robust metric for assessing their APPLE-estimated recurrence risk. The accuracy of AF recurrence risk perception was calculated via comparing recurrence risk perception against APPLE-estimated recurrence risk and was then classified into three categories: “underestimated”, “accurate,” and “overestimated”. Additionally, logistic regression analysis was employed to examine the factors that may contribute to patients’ inaccurate perception of their recurrence risk.</p> Results <p>Our consistency analysis showed that 38.31% of patients underestimated their AF recurrence risk, while 28.72% overestimated it. Multinomial logistic regression analyses demonstrated that individuals with lower social support (OR = 0.519; 95% CI: 0.393–0.686; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) and an indifferent attitude towards AF recurrence (OR = 0.028; 95%CI: 0.005–0.152; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) were more likely to underestimate their risk. In contrast, those with increased levels of anxiety (OR = 2.065; 95%CI: 1.423–2.996; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), diminished ability to perform activities of daily living(OR = 12.614; 95%CI: 3.146–50.574; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), and worry about recurrent AF(OR = 7.978; 95%CI: 1.306–48.742; <i>p</i> = 0.025)demonstrated a greater tendency to overestimate their risk.</p> Conclusions <p>This study showed that many participants after AF ablation had inaccurate perceptions of their AF recurrence risk. Among them, those who underestimated the risk accounted for a large proportion, factors associated with low social support and an indifferent attitude towards AF recurrence.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Consistency between recurrent risk perception and objective recurrence risk in patients after atrial fibrillation ablation: a cross-sectional study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月18日

查看全文
  • Guangdi Xi,
  • Min Shan,
  • Yaoyao Ding,
  • Xiaohong Lu,
  • Ying Zhang,
  • Fang Zhang,
  • Jianan Xu,
  • Wenwen Li,
  • Fuguo Yang

摘要

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the consistency between the patients’ recurrent risk perception and APPLE-estimated recurrence risk after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and to investigate the factors possibly contributing to the inconsistency between them.

Methods

This study included 210 hospitalized patients who underwent AF ablation in the cardiology departments of two tertiary care hospitals in Qingdao. We utilized a single question to measure AF recurrence risk perception of the participants; and the APPLE score served as a robust metric for assessing their APPLE-estimated recurrence risk. The accuracy of AF recurrence risk perception was calculated via comparing recurrence risk perception against APPLE-estimated recurrence risk and was then classified into three categories: “underestimated”, “accurate,” and “overestimated”. Additionally, logistic regression analysis was employed to examine the factors that may contribute to patients’ inaccurate perception of their recurrence risk.

Results

Our consistency analysis showed that 38.31% of patients underestimated their AF recurrence risk, while 28.72% overestimated it. Multinomial logistic regression analyses demonstrated that individuals with lower social support (OR = 0.519; 95% CI: 0.393–0.686; p < 0.001) and an indifferent attitude towards AF recurrence (OR = 0.028; 95%CI: 0.005–0.152; p < 0.001) were more likely to underestimate their risk. In contrast, those with increased levels of anxiety (OR = 2.065; 95%CI: 1.423–2.996; p < 0.001), diminished ability to perform activities of daily living(OR = 12.614; 95%CI: 3.146–50.574; p < 0.001), and worry about recurrent AF(OR = 7.978; 95%CI: 1.306–48.742; p = 0.025)demonstrated a greater tendency to overestimate their risk.

Conclusions

This study showed that many participants after AF ablation had inaccurate perceptions of their AF recurrence risk. Among them, those who underestimated the risk accounted for a large proportion, factors associated with low social support and an indifferent attitude towards AF recurrence.