Dataset Information

Patient-reported outcomes and subsequent management in atrial fibrillation clinical practice: Results from the Utah mEVAL AF program.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) significantly reduces health-related quality of life (HRQoL), previously measured in clinical trials using patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We examined AF PROs in clinical practice and their association with subsequent clinical management.

Methods

The Utah My Evaluation (mEVAL) program collects the Toronto AF Symptom Severity Scale (AFSS) in AF outpatients at the University of Utah. Baseline factors associated with worse AF symptom score (range 0-35, higher is worse) were identified in univariate and multivariable analyses. Secondary outcomes included AF burden and AF healthcare utilization. We also compared subsequent clinical management at 6 months between patients with better versus worse AF HRQoL.

Results

Overall, 1338 patients completed the AFSS symptom score, which varied by sex (mean 7.26 for males vs. 10.27 for females; p < .001), age (<65, 9.73; 65-74, 7.66; ≥75, 7.58; p < .001), heart failure (9.39 with HF vs. 7.67 without; p < .001), and prior ablation (7.28 with prior ablation vs. 8.84; p < .001). In multivariable analysis, younger age (mean difference 2.92 for <65 vs. ≥75; p < .001), female sex (mean difference 2.57; p < .001), pulmonary disease (mean difference 1.88; p < .001), and depression (mean difference 2.46; p < .001) were associated with higher scores. At 6-months, worse baseline symptom score was associated with the use of rhythm control (37.1% vs. 24.5%; p < .001). Similar cofactors and results were associated with increased AF burden and health care utilization scores.

Conclusions

AF PROs in clinical practice identify highly-symptomatic patients, corroborating findings in more controlled, clinical trials. Increased AFSS score correlates with more aggressive clinical management, supporting the utility of disease-specific PROs guiding clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Zenger B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7749047 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess whether atrial fibrillation (AF) self-screening stations in general practice waiting rooms improve AF screening, diagnosis, and stroke risk management.Design, settingIntervention study (planned duration: twelve weeks) in six New South Wales general practices (two in rural locations, four in greater metropolitan Sydney), undertaken during 28 August 2020 - 5 August 2021.ParticipantsPeople aged 65 years or more who had not previously been diagnosed with AF, and had appointments for face-to-face GP consultations. People with valvular AF were excluded.InterventionAF self-screening station and software, integrated with practice electronic medical record programs, that identified and invited participation by eligible patients, and exported single-lead electrocardiograms and automated evaluations to patients' medical records.Main outcome measuresScreening rate; incidence of newly diagnosed AF during intervention and pre-intervention periods; prescribing of guideline-recommended anticoagulant medications.ResultsAcross the six participating practices, 2835 of 7849 eligible patients (36.1%) had face-to-face GP appointments during the intervention period, of whom 1127 completed AF self-screening (39.8%; range by practice: 12-74%). AF was diagnosed in 49 screened patients (4.3%), 44 of whom (90%) had CHA2 DS2 -VA scores of 2 or more (high stroke risk). The incidence of newly diagnosed AF during the pre-intervention period was 11 cases per 1000 eligible patients; during the intervention period, it was 22 per 1000 eligible patients (screen-detected: 17 per 1000 eligible patients; otherwise detected: 4.6 per 1000 eligible patients). Prescribing of oral anticoagulation therapy for people newly diagnosed with AF and high stroke risk was similar during the pre-intervention (20 of 24, 83%) and intervention periods (46 of 54, 85%).ConclusionsAF self-screening in general practice waiting rooms is a feasible approach to increasing AF screening and diagnosis rates by reducing time barriers to screening by GPs. AF self-screening could reduce the number of AF-related strokes.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12620000233921 (prospective).

Project description:IntroductionA multidisciplinary approach is needed for the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in which the patient has a central role. Smart devices create opportunities to improve AF management. This paper aimed to evaluate the in-house developed AF-EduApp application on its usability, satisfaction, and communication effectiveness with the care team.MethodsDuring a multicenter, prospective randomized controlled trial, 153 AF patients were included in the AF-EduApp study, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months and a maximum follow-up of 15 months if taking oral anticoagulation (OAC). The AF-EduApp contains six main modules: Questionnaires, Education, Measurement data entry, Medication overview with reminders, Appointments, and Communication with the care team. The App focuses on four main goals: (1) to improve AF knowledge, (2) to increase self-care capabilities, (3) electronic monitoring to improve therapy adherence to OAC, and (4) communication with the care team. Patients unable to use the AF-EduApp were assigned to a no-App control group (n = 41) without intervention comparable to the standard care group (SC, n = 346) of the AF-EduCare study.ResultsA total of 152 patients effectively used the App during a mean follow-up of 386.8 ± 108. 1 days (one included patient could not install the application due to an iPhone from the United States). They opened the application on average on 130.1 ± 144.7 days. Of the 109 patients still in follow-up after 12 months (i.e. patients who did not withdraw and on OAC), 90 patients (82.6%) actively used the application at least one day in the next 41 days. The Measurement module was the most used, with a median of used days over the total available days of 6.4%. A total of 75 App patients (49.3%) asked questions, mostly clinical-related questions (e.g. medication use, or actionability on clinical entered parameters). A mean score of 8.1 ± 1.7 about the "perceived quality of follow-up in the past year" was given by the App ITT patients, compared to a score of 7.7 ± 2.0 by the SC group (P = .072). Patients who used the App were more attracted to future follow-up with an application compared to patients who would be capable of using the application of the SC group (31.6% vs. 12.5%; P < .001).ConclusionThis study showed a positive attitude towards using a mobile application, with AF patients using the application one-third of the available days. Patients used the App most for entering measured parameters, and to contact the care team.

Project description:BackgroundThe potential effectiveness of integrated management in further improving the prognosis of patients with atrial fibrillation has been demonstrated; however, the best strategy for implementation remains to be discovered.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to ascertain the feasibility of implementing integrated atrial fibrillation care via the Hospital-Community-Family-Based Telemedicine (HCFT-AF) program.MethodsIn this single-arm, pre-post design pilot study, a multidisciplinary teamwork, supported by efficient infrastructures, provided patients with integrated atrial fibrillation care following the Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway. Eligible patients were continuously recruited and followed up for at least 4 months. The patients' drug adherence, and atrial fibrillation-relevant lifestyles and behaviors were assessed at baseline and at 4 months. The acceptability, feasibility, and usability of the HCFT-AF technology devices and engagement with the HCFT-AF program were assessed at 4 months.ResultsA total of 73 patients (mean age, 68.42 years; 52% male) were enrolled in November 2019 with a median follow up of 132 days (IQR 125-138 days). The patients' drug adherence significantly improved after the 4-month intervention (P<.001). The vast majority (94%, 64/68) of indicated patients received anticoagulant therapy at 4 months, and none of them received antiplatelet therapy unless there was an additional indication. The atrial fibrillation-relevant lifestyles and behaviors ameliorated to varying degrees at the end of the study. In general, the majority of patients provided good feedback on the HCFT-AF intervention. More than three-quarters (76%, 54/71) of patients used the software or website more than once a week and accomplished clinic visits as scheduled.ConclusionsThe atrial fibrillation-integrated care model described in this study is associated with improved drug adherence, standardized therapy rate, and lifestyles of patients, which highlights the possibility to better deliver integrated atrial fibrillation management.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT04127799; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04127799.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) in people aged ≥65 years is recommended by international guidelines. The Atrial Fibrillation Screen, Management And guideline-Recommended Therapy (AF-SMART) studies of opportunistic AF screening in 16 metropolitan and rural general practices were conducted from November 2016-June 2019. These studies trialled custom-designed eHealth tools to support all stages of AF screening in general practice. METHODS:A realist evaluation of the AF-SMART studies, which aimed to explain the circumstances in which the program worked (or not) to increase the proportion of people screened for AF. The initial program theory was based on our previous research, policy documents and screening studies. To test this, we conducted 45 semi-structured interviews with general practitioners (GPs), nurses and practice managers across all participating practices, and collected observational and quantitative screening data. These data were analysed and interpreted to refine the program theory. RESULTS:GPs/nurses liked the eHealth tools, although technical problems sometimes disrupted screening. Time was the main barrier to screening for GPs/nurses, so systems need to be very efficient. Practices with leadership from a senior GP 'screening champion' had broader uptake, especially from the nursing team. Providing regular feedback on screening data was beneficial for quality improvement and motivation. Clear protocols for follow-up of abnormal results were required for successful nurse-led screening in a hierarchical system. Participation in the program had broader benefits of improving AF knowledge and raising the profile of cardiovascular health in the practice. Screening for a shorter, more intense period (eg during influenza vaccination) worked well for practices where sufficient staff time was allocated. CONCLUSIONS:Introducing an AF screening program is likely to be successful in contexts where there is a senior GP 'screening champion', a clear protocol exists for abnormal results, and there is regular data reporting to staff. These contexts link to mechanisms around motivation, leadership, empowerment of nurses, and efficient screening systems. The contexts and mechanisms contribute to the longer-term outcomes of increasing the proportion of people screened and treated for AF, which is recommended by guidelines as a key strategy for the prevention of AF-related stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS:AF SMART (metropolitan): ACTRN12616000850471 (Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry). AF SMART II (rural): ACTRN12618000004268 (Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry).