BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is an indicator of quality of care and a key factor for patients' healthcare choices. Although atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is now common, there are no published data on patient satisfaction during this procedure. METHODS: Anonymous patient satisfaction questionnaires were distributed to consecutive AF ablation patients over 6 months at a single center. RESULTS: Of 101 questionnaires returned, 51 % related to a first procedure. Pre-operative clinic experiences were good. Prior to ablation, 53 % reported receiving information leaflets, while 55 % reported using the Internet to search for further information. Mean anxiety pre-procedurally on a ten-point scale was 3.1 ± 2.9 and 97 % of patients felt prepared. Afterwards, however, 31 % found the experience not as expected, mainly due to being in more pain or more awake. A large number of patients recalled the procedure in detail, despite use of conscious sedation. Overall cath lab experience was good or excellent for the majority (79 %). Patients felt less well than expected immediately post-procedure and perceived a higher complication rate immediately after ablation (24 %) and at home (32 %) than reported by physicians (4.5 %). Despite this, 89 % would recommend an AF ablation to a friend or relative, and 96 % would recommend our institution. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that most patients are satisfied with the AF ablation experience, but this is not solely dependent on procedural success. Dissatisfaction occurs due to unmet expectations, particularly excess pain, i.e. greater than expected, during and after ablation. An improved consent process may improve patient experience. Physicians should also address initiatives to reduce pain during AF ablation.
BACKGROUND:Patient satisfaction is an indicator of quality of care and a key factor for patients' healthcare choices. Although atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is now common, there are no published data on patient satisfaction during this procedure. METHODS: Anonymous patient satisfaction questionnaires were distributed to consecutive AF ablation patients over 6 months at a single center. RESULTS: Of 101 questionnaires returned, 51 % related to a first procedure. Pre-operative clinic experiences were good. Prior to ablation, 53 % reported receiving information leaflets, while 55 % reported using the Internet to search for further information. Mean anxiety pre-procedurally on a ten-point scale was 3.1 ± 2.9 and 97 % of patients felt prepared. Afterwards, however, 31 % found the experience not as expected, mainly due to being in more pain or more awake. A large number of patients recalled the procedure in detail, despite use of conscious sedation. Overall cath lab experience was good or excellent for the majority (79 %). Patients felt less well than expected immediately post-procedure and perceived a higher complication rate immediately after ablation (24 %) and at home (32 %) than reported by physicians (4.5 %). Despite this, 89 % would recommend an AF ablation to a friend or relative, and 96 % would recommend our institution. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that most patients are satisfied with the AF ablation experience, but this is not solely dependent on procedural success. Dissatisfaction occurs due to unmet expectations, particularly excess pain, i.e. greater than expected, during and after ablation. An improved consent process may improve patient experience. Physicians should also address initiatives to reduce pain during AF ablation.
Authors: Salvador Pita-Fernández; María Pilar Fariñas-Garrido; Eva María Suárez-Fontaíña; Josefina Amor-Cambón; Irma Sánchez-Suárez; María Carmen Rúa-Pérez; María Dolores Varela-Tomé; Sonia Pértega-Díaz Journal: J Cardiovasc Nurs Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.083
Authors: Tushar Vilas Salukhe; Stephan Willems; Imke Drewitz; Daniel Steven; Boris A Hoffmann; Katrin Heitmann; Thomas Rostock Journal: Europace Date: 2011-10-23 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Jeremiah Wasserlauf; Rachel M Kaplan; David R Walega; Rishi Arora; Alexandru B Chicos; Susan S Kim; Albert C Lin; Nishant Verma; Kaustubha D Patil; Bradley P Knight; Rod S Passman Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2020-05-27 Impact factor: 2.942