Factors influencing patient engagement in decision-making for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a cross-sectional survey.

Fengwei Dong, Yaping Wu, Qing Wang, Yan Huang, Qing Wu
{"title":"Factors influencing patient engagement in decision-making for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a cross-sectional survey.","authors":"Fengwei Dong, Yaping Wu, Qing Wang, Yan Huang, Qing Wu","doi":"10.1093/eurjcn/zvae141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Patient engagement in decision-making could improve healthcare quality and health outcome, which has been emphasized in atrial fibrillation (AF) management guidelines. However, patients report relatively low level of engagement in decision-making for catheter ablation (CA). Therefore, this study aims to explore the influencing factors of AF patient engagement in decision-making for CA.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted. A total of 836 patients were recruited from six tertiary hospitals in Shanghai. Adapted version of the Control Preferences Scale, Chinese version of the All Aspects of Health Literacy Scale, Chinese version of the Facilitation of Patient Involvement Scale, and the Atrial Fibrillation Knowledge Questionnaire were used to measure patient engagement in decision-making, health literacy, perception of physician facilitation, and AF knowledge, respectively. Of the 750 patients who returned valid questionnaires, 20.2% of the patients reported active engagement in decision-making, 39.5% reported collaborative engagement, and 40.3% reported passive engagement. Compared with patients perceiving passive engagement, those with collaborative or active engagement were more likely to be female and have higher income, moderate European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) class (II and III), higher perception of physician facilitation, higher health literacy, and higher AF knowledge (P < 0.05 for all). The collaborative engagement group exhibited a shorter AF duration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The degree of patient engagement in CA decision-making varied, with most perceiving passive engagement. Patient engagement in decision-making was influenced by gender, income, duration of AF, EHRA class, perception of physician facilitation, health literacy, and AF knowledge.</p>","PeriodicalId":93997,"journal":{"name":"European journal of cardiovascular nursing","volume":" ","pages":"150-157"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of cardiovascular nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvae141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Patient engagement in decision-making could improve healthcare quality and health outcome, which has been emphasized in atrial fibrillation (AF) management guidelines. However, patients report relatively low level of engagement in decision-making for catheter ablation (CA). Therefore, this study aims to explore the influencing factors of AF patient engagement in decision-making for CA.

Methods and results: A cross-sectional study was conducted. A total of 836 patients were recruited from six tertiary hospitals in Shanghai. Adapted version of the Control Preferences Scale, Chinese version of the All Aspects of Health Literacy Scale, Chinese version of the Facilitation of Patient Involvement Scale, and the Atrial Fibrillation Knowledge Questionnaire were used to measure patient engagement in decision-making, health literacy, perception of physician facilitation, and AF knowledge, respectively. Of the 750 patients who returned valid questionnaires, 20.2% of the patients reported active engagement in decision-making, 39.5% reported collaborative engagement, and 40.3% reported passive engagement. Compared with patients perceiving passive engagement, those with collaborative or active engagement were more likely to be female and have higher income, moderate European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) class (II and III), higher perception of physician facilitation, higher health literacy, and higher AF knowledge (P < 0.05 for all). The collaborative engagement group exhibited a shorter AF duration.

Conclusion: The degree of patient engagement in CA decision-making varied, with most perceiving passive engagement. Patient engagement in decision-making was influenced by gender, income, duration of AF, EHRA class, perception of physician facilitation, health literacy, and AF knowledge.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
影响患者参与心房颤动导管消融决策的因素:一项横断面调查。
目的:患者参与决策可提高医疗质量和健康效果,这一点已在心房颤动(AF)管理指南中得到强调。然而,患者对导管消融术(CA)决策的参与度相对较低。因此,本研究旨在探讨心房颤动患者参与导管消融决策的影响因素:本研究采用横断面研究方法。方法:本研究为横断面研究,从上海六家三级甲等医院共招募了 836 名患者。采用改编版控制偏好量表、中文版健康素养各方面量表、中文版促进患者参与量表和心房颤动知识问卷分别测量患者参与决策、健康素养、对医生促进的感知和心房颤动知识。在 750 名交回有效问卷的患者中,20.2% 的患者表示主动参与决策,39.5% 表示合作参与,40.3% 表示被动参与。与被动参与的患者相比,合作参与或主动参与的患者更可能是女性、收入较高、中等 EHRA 等级(II 级和 III 级)、对医生协助的感知较高、健康素养较高和房颤知识较高(所有数据的 P 均<0.05)。合作参与组的房颤持续时间更短:结论:患者参与 CA 决策的程度各不相同,大多数患者认为自己是被动参与。患者参与决策受性别、收入、心房颤动持续时间、EHRA等级、对医生协助的感知、健康素养和心房颤动知识的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mapping Memories: Enhancing Retrospective Data with the Life History Calendar. The struggle is real! Measuring and managing heart failure congestion in the outpatient setting. From invisible to visible: a new position for informal caregivers. Exploring the full potential of the electronic health record: the application of natural language processing for clinical practice. Psychological interventions for depression and anxiety in patients with coronary heart disease, heart failure or atrial fibrillation: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1