Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 20, 2026
Estimating Bilateral Atrial Function by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Feature Tracking in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: July 20, 2022
Consistency between recurrent risk perception and objective recurrence risk in patients after atrial fibrillation
Guangdi Xi1,2, Min Shan3, Yaoyao Ding4
1Qingdao Municipal Key Laboratory for Smart Chronic Disease Management and Digital Rehabilitation Nursing, Qingdao University School of Nursing, Qingdao, Shandong, 266000, China.
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.
Related Concept Videos
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
01:25Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management