Background/Objectives: Multidisciplinary TAVI programs are focused on improving patient-centred care. We compared outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) within a multidisciplinary programme including a nurse with those of patients in the standard programme. Methods: This single-centre observational retrospective study includes patients with severe aortic valve disease and a TAVI indication, with the goal of comparing a nurse programme with standard practice. In the TAVI nursing programme, the nurse has several key roles: patient and family education, comprehensive assessment and procedure planification, patient and family accompaniment, complications detection during admission and follow-up, and patient experience evaluation in the post-procedure period. Results: 154 patients were included: 87 in the nurse programme and 67 in standard practice groups, respectively. Men comprised 52.6%, with an average age of 81 years. Both groups achieved high procedure success without differences in mortality during admission and follow-up (median 13.4 months). The nurse programme group showed better functional class more frequently and had significantly fewer emergency department visits (11.8% vs. 31.3%) and less frequency of readmission (1.2% vs. 23.4%). The TAVI nurse group reported significantly higher overall satisfaction with the process (9.8 vs. 8.9 scores), with the information received and the nurse treatment being the best rated items. Conclusions: A multidisciplinary programme for patients undergoing TAVI, coordinated by nurses and based on comprehensive attention that places the patients at the centre of the process, is feasible and shows high patient satisfaction.

Background and Objectives: Degenerative aortic stenosis has become the most common primary valve lesion referred for intervention, with thousands of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) procedures being performed annually. To date, there are no quantitative tools capable of evaluating patient experience adapted to percutaneous procedures of this nature. The goal of this study is to propose and validate the VALVEX questionnaire as the reference tool to assess patient experience throughout the TAVI process and to identify areas for improvement in healthcare. Methods: This was a cross-sectional observational study with a 30-day follow-up that included consecutive patients > 18 years of age undergoing elective TAVI in two Spanish hospitals. A multidisciplinary panel including patients was constituted to design, refine, and pilot the VALVEX questionnaire. During its completion 30 days after the procedure, the dimensions assessed were the care provided before, during, and after TAVI, as well as the facilities and overall patient satisfaction. Reliability, validity, and feasibility were analysed during the validation phase. Results: A total of 335 patients were enrolled and filled out the VALVEX questionnaire (mean age 81.1 ± 5 years, 52% female). Evaluation of feasibility showed a mean completion time of 7.8 ± 2.3 min, with a 2.1% rate of unanswered questions. Cronbach’s alpha index was 0.912, with high internal reliability measurements for all the assessed dimensions. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.851 was determined as an indicator of stability. The Delphi panel achieved a consensus of over 85% in clarity, coherence, relevance, and sufficiency. Conclusions: We have successfully validated the VALVEX questionnaire as the first quantitative tool specifically designed to measure and evaluate patient experience throughout the TAVI procedure and recovery. This questionnaire is a valid, reliable, simple, and easy-to-use resource that could be used as a reference tool to assess patient experience for TAVI or other percutaneous cardiac interventions.