Observational studyMedicine2025
Impact of quantitative evaluation nursing on intraoperative risk events and stress responses in patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation.
Observational study in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to analyze the impact of intervention room nursing based on quantitative evaluation strategies on intraoperative risk events and stress responses in patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for atrial fibrillation (AF). A quantitative retrospective cohort study was conducted. A total of 126 patients with AF were selected and divided into a quantitative evaluation nursing group of 63 cases and a routine nursing group of 63 cases. The 2 groups were compared in terms of visual analog scale (VAS), Chinese version of disease uncertainty scale, Chinese version of psychological resilience scale, intraoperative risk events, sinus rhythm, recovery, levels of norepinephrine (NE) and cortisol (CORT). The VAS scores for pre- and post-surgery room entry were significantly lower in the quantitative evaluation nursing group compared to the routine nursing group. Following intervention, the Chinese version of disease uncertainty scale scores and incidence of intraoperative risk events were significantly reduced in the quantitative evaluation nursing group, while the Chinese version of psychological resilience scale was notably higher. Additionally, the quantitative evaluation nursing group exhibited significantly higher rates of sinus rhythm maintenance on the day of surgery, at discharge, and 1 to 3 months post-surgery. Quantitative assessment further indicated significantly lower levels of NE and CORT in the quantitative evaluation nursing group. Quantitative evaluation strategies can effectively reduce the level of surgical fear and decrease the incidence of intraoperative risk events in patients undergoing RFA for AF. Patients undergoing RFA for AF were integral to our study. We engaged them through feedback sessions during the design phase to ensure our interventions addressed their concerns. Their experiences informed data interpretation, helping us understand the real-world impact of nursing strategies. Additionally, patients and caregivers reviewed the manuscript, providing insights that enhanced its clarity and relevance to those affected by AF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.