Key result
The U22 protocol quantified symptoms associated with SVTA, yielding mean scores of 5.6 for well-being, 7.5 for arrhythmia effects, and 8.0 for discomfort on 0-10 scales.
Why the study?
Does the U22 protocol effectively quantify symptoms associated with supraventricular tachyarrhythmias compared to the SF-36 questionnaire?
Observational (n=88)
Does the U22 protocol effectively quantify symptoms associated with supraventricular tachyarrhythmias compared to the SF-36 questionnaire?
The U22 protocol is a useful tool for quantifying specific paroxysmal symptoms and discomfort associated with supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, offering advantages over general quality of life measures like SF-36.
Supports U22 for SVTA symptom quantification; leaves open superiority to SF-36 pending validation studies.
BACKGROUND: The main indication for ablation of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVTA) is symptomatic relief. Specific paroxysmal symptoms cannot be quantified with general measures of quality of life, such as with the SF-36 questionnaire. U22 is a new protocol which measures the effects of arrhythmia on well-being, the intensity of discomfort during an episode, the type and temporal characteristics of dominant symptoms, and the duration and frequency of episodes. Discrete 0-10 scales are used. Unlike SF-36, U22 can be used in individual patients. METHODS: U22 and SF-36 protocols were used in the symptomatic evaluation of 88 patients (mean age = 49.6 +/- 16.4 years; 43 men), who underwent catheter ablation of SVTA. RESULTS: The U22 scores (SD) for (a) well-being (10 being best), (b) effects of arrhythmia on well-being (10 being worst), and (c) discomfort during arrhythmia (10 being worst) were 5.6 (2.7), 7.5 (2.8), and 8.0 (2.4), respectively. For comparison, the physical and mental component summaries of SF-36 were 45.3 (11.0) and 45.2 (12.1), respectively, slightly lower than the expected normal of 50. The intensity of dominant symptom scored by U22 was 9.7 (1.2), 10 being worst. In 29% of patients > or =4 symptoms were equally dominant. Multiple dominant symptoms in U22 were associated with a low general well-being in SF-36. CONCLUSION: We found U22 useful to quantify symptoms associated with SVTA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kesek et al. (2009) conducted an observational in Supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVTA) (n=88). U22 protocol vs. SF-36 protocol was evaluated on Symptomatic evaluation scores (well-being, effects of arrhythmia, discomfort). The U22 protocol quantified symptoms associated with SVTA, yielding mean scores of 5.6 for well-being, 7.5 for arrhythmia effects, and 8.0 for discomfort on 0-10 scales.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: