Patient perspectives on same-day discharge following catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: results from a patient survey as part of the monocentric FAST AFA trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Same-day discharge (SDD) following catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) was already introduced in selected facilities in Europe, but a widespread implementation has not yet succeeded. Data on patients' perspectives are lacking. Therefore, we conducted a survey to address patients' beliefs towards SDD and identify variables that are associated with their evaluation. METHODS AND RESULTS: As part of the prospective, monocentric FAST AFA trial, patients aged ≥20 years undergoing left atrial CA for AF were asked to participate in the survey consisting of a study-specific questionnaire, the AF knowledge scale, and pre-defined patient-reported outcome measures. The study cohort was stratified based on SDD willingness, and a logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors for patients' valuation. Between 26 July 2021 and 01 July 2022, 256 of 376 screened patients consented to study participation of whom 248 (mean age 61.8 years, 33.9% female) completed the SDD survey. Of them, 50.0% were willing to have SDD concepts integrated into their clinical course with increased patient comfort (27.5%), shorter waiting times (14.6%), and a cost-efficient treatment (14.0%) being imaginable benefits. In contrast, expressed concerns included uncertainties with occurring complaints (50.6%), the insufficient recognition (47.8%), and treatment (48.9%) of complications. European Heart Rhythm Association class at baseline and inpatient treatments within the preceding year were predictors for SDD willingness whereas comorbidity burden or AF knowledge were not. CONCLUSION: We provide a detailed survey expressing patients' beliefs towards SDD following left atrial CA. Our findings may facilitate adequate patient selection to improve the future implementation of SDD programs in suitable cohorts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".