Dataset Information

Treating Specialty and Outcomes in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation: From the TREAT-AF Study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Atrial fibrillation (AF) occurs in many clinical contexts and is diagnosed and treated by clinicians across many specialties. This approach has resulted in treatment variations. OBJECTIVES:The goal of this study was to evaluate the association between treating specialty and AF outcomes among patients newly diagnosed with AF. METHODS:Using data from the TREAT-AF (Retrospective Evaluation and Assessment of Therapies in AF) study from the Veterans Health Administration, patients with newly diagnosed, nonvalvular AF between 2004 and 2012 were identified who had at least 1 outpatient encounter with primary care or cardiology within 90 days of the AF diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the association between treating specialty and AF outcomes. RESULTS:Among 184,161 patients with newly diagnosed AF (age 70 ± 11 years; 1.7% women; CHA2DS2-VASc score 2.6 ± 1.7), 40% received cardiology care and 60% received primary care only. After adjustment for covariates, cardiology care was associated with reductions in stroke (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86 to 0.96; p < 0.001) and death (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.88 to 0.91; p < 0.0001) and increases in hospitalizations for AF/supraventricular tachycardia (HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.35 to 1.42; p < 0.0001) and myocardial infarction (HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.05; p < 0.04). The propensity-matched cohort had similar results. In mediation analysis, oral anticoagulation prescription within 90 days of diagnosis may have mediated reductions in stroke but did not mediate reductions in survival. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with newly diagnosed AF, cardiology care was associated with improved outcomes, potentially mediated by early prescription of oral anticoagulation therapy. Although hypothesis-generating, these data warrant serious consideration and study of health care system interventions at the time of new AF diagnosis.

SUBMITTER: Perino AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5830104 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Treating Specialty and Outcomes in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation: From the TREAT-AF Study.

Perino Alexander C AC Fan Jun J Schmitt Susan K SK Askari Mariam M Kaiser Daniel W DW Deshmukh Abhishek A Heidenreich Paul A PA Swan Christopher C Narayan Sanjiv M SM Wang Paul J PJ Turakhia Mintu P MP

Journal of the American College of Cardiology 20170701 1

<h4>Background</h4>Atrial fibrillation (AF) occurs in many clinical contexts and is diagnosed and treated by clinicians across many specialties. This approach has resulted in treatment variations.<h4>Objectives</h4>The goal of this study was to evaluate the association between treating specialty and AF outcomes among patients newly diagnosed with AF.<h4>Methods</h4>Using data from the TREAT-AF (Retrospective Evaluation and Assessment of Therapies in AF) study from the Veterans Health Administrat ...[more]

PMID: 28662810

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and Purpose: Once a stroke occurs in a patient with atrial fibrillation (AF), it is likely to be severe. Patients with newly diagnosed AF after stroke and those with known AF before stroke have different background characteristics, yet the difference in stroke severity has not been sufficiently evaluated. In the current study, we compared the stroke severity and in-hospital outcomes between these patient groups. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a database of 196 patients with acute ischemic stroke and AF between January 2010 and October 2019. We divided the patients into two groups: patients with "newly diagnosed AF" and those with "known AF." We assessed the stroke severity using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score on admission and in-hospital outcomes using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at discharge. Results: The proportion of newly diagnosed AF was 33% (64/196). There were no differences in age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and past history of heart failure between patients with newly diagnosed AF and those with known AF. Patients with newly diagnosed AF were associated with a lower proportion of male sex (male; 50 vs. 67%, p < 0.05), a lower proportion of past history of stroke (12 vs. 35%, p < 0.01), a lower CHA2DS2-VASc score (median [interquartile range]; 3 [2-4] vs. 3.5 [3-5], p < 0.01), and a lower proportion of pre-stroke oral anticoagulation (5 vs. 59%, p < 0.01). There were no differences in the NIHSS score on admission (12 [4-19] vs. 9 [3-19]) or the mRS score at discharge (3 [1-5] vs. 3 [1-5]). After adjustment for relevant covariates, newly diagnosed AF was not associated with the NIHSS score on admission [adjusted common odds ratio (OR), 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45-1.60] or the mRS score at discharge (adjusted common OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.88-3.18). After propensity score matching, newly diagnosed AF was not associated with the NIHSS score on admission (adjusted common OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.48-1.73) and the mRS score at discharge (adjusted common OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.92-3.43). Conclusion: Stroke severity and in-hospital outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed AF did not differ from those in patients with known AF after adjustment for clinically relevant factors. The importance of detection of latent AF and subsequent anticoagulation in preventing severe stroke should be further emphasized.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS:A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION:Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362.

Project description:Background It remains controversial whether long-term clinical impact of newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) in the acute phase of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is different from that of prior AF diagnosed before the onset of AMI. Methods and Results The current study population from the CREDO-Kyoto AMI (Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto Acute Myocardial Infarction) Registry Wave-2 consisted of 6228 patients with AMI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. The baseline characteristics and long-term clinical outcomes were compared according to AF status (newly diagnosed AF: N=489 [7.9%], prior AF: N=589 [9.5%], and no AF: N=5150 [82.7%]). Median follow-up duration was 5.5 years. Patients with newly diagnosed AF and prior AF had similar baseline characteristics with higher risk profile than those with no AF including older age and more comorbidities. The cumulative 5-year incidence of all-cause death was higher in newly diagnosed AF and prior AF than no AF (38.8%, 40.7%, and 18.7%, P<0.001). The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality of newly diagnosed AF and prior AF relative to no AF remained significant with similar magnitude (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.54; P<0.001, and HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.14-1.52; P<0.001, respectively). The cumulative 5-year incidence of stroke decreased in the order of newly diagnosed AF, prior AF and no AF (15.5%, 12.9%, and 6.3%, respectively, P<0.001). The higher adjusted HRs of both newly diagnosed AF and prior AF relative to no AF were significant for stroke, with a greater risk of newly diagnosed AF than that of prior AF (HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.56-2.69; P<0.001, and HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.00-1.78; P=0.048, respectively). The higher stroke risk of newly diagnosed AF compared with prior AF was largely driven by the greater risk within 30 days. The higher adjusted HRs of newly diagnosed AF and prior AF relative to no AF were significant for heart failure hospitalization (HR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.35-2.22; P<0.001, and HR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.82-2.74; P<0.001, respectively) and major bleeding (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.23-1.73; P<0.001, and HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.15-1.60; P<0.001, respectively). Conclusions Newly diagnosed AF in AMI had risks for mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and major bleeding higher than no AF, and comparable to prior AF. The risk of newly diagnosed AF for stroke might be higher than that of prior AF.

Project description:ObjectiveIn patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF), do baseline risk factors and stroke prevention strategies account for the geographically diverse outcomes.DesignGlobal Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation is a prospective multinational non-interventional registry of patients with newly diagnosed AF (n=52 018 patients).SettingInvestigator sites (n=1317) were representative of the care settings/locations in each of the 35 participating countries. Treatment decisions were all determined by the local responsible clinicians.ParticipantsThe patients (18 years and over) with newly diagnosed AF had at least 1 investigator-determined stroke risk factor and patients were not required to meet specific thresholds of risk score for anticoagulant treatment.Main outcomes and measuresObserved 1-year event rates and risk-standardised rates were derived.ResultsRates of death, non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding varied more than three-to-four fold across countries even after adjustment for baseline factors and antithrombotic treatments. Rates of anticoagulation and antithrombotic treatment varied widely. Patients from countries with the highest rates of cardiovascular mortality and stroke were among the least likely to receive oral anticoagulants. Beyond anticoagulant treatment, variations in the treatment of comorbidities and lifestyle factors may have contributed to the variations in outcomes. Countries with the lowest healthcare Access and Quality indices (India, Ukraine, Argentina, Brazil) had the highest risk-standardised mortality.ConclusionThe variability in outcomes across countries for patients with newly diagnosed AF is not accounted for by baseline characteristics and antithrombotic treatments. Residual mortality rates were correlated with Healthcare Access and Quality indices. The findings suggest the management of patients with AF needs to not only address guideline indicated and sustained anticoagulation, but also the treatment of comorbidities and lifestyle factors.Trial registration numberNCT01090362.

Project description:Importance:Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke should receive oral anticoagulants (OAC). However, approximately 1 in 8 patients in the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field (GARFIELD-AF) registry are treated with antiplatelet (AP) drugs in addition to OAC, with or without documented vascular disease or other indications for AP therapy. Objective:To investigate baseline characteristics and outcomes of patients who were prescribed OAC plus AP therapy vs OAC alone. Design, Setting, and Participants:Prospective cohort study of the GARFIELD-AF registry, an international, multicenter, observational study of adults aged 18 years and older with recently diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and at least 1 risk factor for stroke enrolled between March 2010 and August 2016. Data were extracted for analysis in October 2017 and analyzed from April 2018 to June 2019. Exposure:Participants received either OAC plus AP or OAC alone. Main Outcomes and Measures:Clinical outcomes were measured over 3 and 12 months. Outcomes were adjusted for 40 covariates, including baseline conditions and medications. Results:A total of 24 436 patients (13 438 [55.0%] male; median [interquartile range] age, 71 [64-78] years) were analyzed. Among eligible patients, those receiving OAC plus AP therapy had a greater prevalence of cardiovascular indications for AP, including acute coronary syndromes (22.0% vs 4.3%), coronary artery disease (39.1% vs 9.8%), and carotid occlusive disease (4.8% vs 2.0%). Over 1 year, patients treated with OAC plus AP had significantly higher incidence rates of stroke (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.49; 95% CI, 1.01-2.20) and any bleeding event (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.70) than those treated with OAC alone. These patients did not show evidence of reduced all-cause mortality (aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.98-1.51). Risk of acute coronary syndrome was not reduced in patients taking OAC plus AP compared with OAC alone (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.70-1.94). Patients treated with OAC plus AP also had higher rates of all clinical outcomes than those treated with OAC alone over the short term (3 months). Conclusions and Relevance:This study challenges the practice of coprescribing OAC plus AP unless there is a clear indication for adding AP to OAC therapy in newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation.

Dataset Information

Treating Specialty and Outcomes in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation: From the TREAT-AF Study.

Publications

Treating Specialty and Outcomes in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation: From the TREAT-AF Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets