2015
DOI: 10.1177/0091217415621265
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationship between the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale score and the success rate of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography

Abstract: Anxiety can be a disadvantage in computed tomography coronary angiography examination. The pre-computed tomography coronary angiography scan Self-Rating Anxiety Scale score may be a useful tool for assessing whether a computed tomography coronary angiography scan will be successful or not.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
31
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We enrolled coronary heart disease patients who received CABG in the Central Hospital of Wuhan from August 2015 to September 2018. The inclusion criteria were: (1) diagnosis with coronary heart disease; (2) multivessel coronary artery diffuse stenosis (>75%) and needing CABG; (3) preoperative mini-mental state examination (MMSE), Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) and Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) indicating no cognitive impairment (illiteracy > 17, primary school > 20, junior high school and above > 25) [18], depression (SDS < 53) [19] or anxiety symptoms (SAS < 50) [20]; (4) significant improvement of vessel stenosis degrees after CABG, and relief of angina pectoris and heart dysfunction. The exclusion criteria were: (1) cognitive impairment according to the preoperative MMSE; (2) severe central nervous system disease or mental illness (stroke, transient ischemic attack, ischemic attack, severe anxiety, drug addiction, alcoholics) or history of brain surgery; (3) intake of nerve or psychiatric drugs; (4) inability to receive the cognitive function assessment because of hearing/visual impairment; (5) combination with other cardiovascular diseases that required extra surgery.…”
Section: Study Populationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We enrolled coronary heart disease patients who received CABG in the Central Hospital of Wuhan from August 2015 to September 2018. The inclusion criteria were: (1) diagnosis with coronary heart disease; (2) multivessel coronary artery diffuse stenosis (>75%) and needing CABG; (3) preoperative mini-mental state examination (MMSE), Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) and Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) indicating no cognitive impairment (illiteracy > 17, primary school > 20, junior high school and above > 25) [18], depression (SDS < 53) [19] or anxiety symptoms (SAS < 50) [20]; (4) significant improvement of vessel stenosis degrees after CABG, and relief of angina pectoris and heart dysfunction. The exclusion criteria were: (1) cognitive impairment according to the preoperative MMSE; (2) severe central nervous system disease or mental illness (stroke, transient ischemic attack, ischemic attack, severe anxiety, drug addiction, alcoholics) or history of brain surgery; (3) intake of nerve or psychiatric drugs; (4) inability to receive the cognitive function assessment because of hearing/visual impairment; (5) combination with other cardiovascular diseases that required extra surgery.…”
Section: Study Populationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dependent variable we focused on was the anxiety status of each pregnant women which was measured by Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS). This scale was designed by William WK Zung in 1971 to quantify a patient's level of anxiety [25]. The SAS scale is a 20-item self-reported assessment questions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the SDS, the normal range is 20 to 49, the mildly depressed range is 50 to 59, the moderately depressed range is 60 to 69, and the severely depressed range is 70 and above (Zung, 1965). The reliability and validity of the SAS and SDS have been evaluated in several studies (Fountoulakis et al, 2001; Jegede, 1977; Olatunji, Deacon, Abramowitz, & Tolin, 2006), and the assessments have been standardized for the Chinese population (Jin & Zhang, 2017; Li, Jin, Qiao, Chen, & Gong, 2016).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%