Atrial fibrillation and oral anticoagulation in older people with frailty: a nationwide primary care electronic health records cohort study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in older people and is associated with increased stroke risk that may be reduced by oral anticoagulation (OAC). Frailty also increases with increasing age, yet the extent of OAC prescription in older people according to extent of frailty in people with AF is insufficiently described.Methods
An electronic health records study of 536,955 patients aged ≥65 years from ResearchOne in England (384 General Practices), over 15.4 months, last follow-up 11th April 2017. OAC prescription for AF with CHA2DS2-Vasc ≥2, adjusted (demographic and treatments) risk of all-cause mortality, and subsequent cerebrovascular disease, bleeding and falls were estimated by electronic frailty index (eFI) category of fit, mild, moderate and severe frailty.Results
AF prevalence and mean CHA2DS2-Vasc for those with AF increased with increasing eFI category (fit 2.9%, 2.2; mild 11.2%, 3.2; moderate 22.2%, 4.0; and severe 31.5%, 5.0). For AF with CHA2DS2-Vasc ≥2, OAC prescription was higher for mild (53.2%), moderate (55.6%) and severe (53.4%) eFI categories than fit (41.7%). In those with AF and eligible for OAC, frailty was associated with increased risk of death (HR for severe frailty compared with fit 4.09, 95% confidence interval 3.43-4.89), gastrointestinal bleeding (2.17, 1.45-3.25), falls (8.03, 4.60-14.03) and, among women, stroke (3.63, 1.10-12.02).Conclusion
Among older people in England, AF and stroke risk increased with increasing degree of frailty; however, OAC prescription approximated 50%. Given competing demands of mortality, morbidity and stroke prevention, greater attention to stratified stroke prevention is needed for this group of the population.
SUBMITTER: Wilkinson C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8099225 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:AimsPeople with atrial fibrillation (AF) frequently live with frailty, which increases the risk of mortality and stroke. This study reports the association between oral anticoagulation (OAC) and outcomes for people with frailty, and whether there is overall net benefit from treatment in people with AF.Methods and resultsRetrospective open cohort electronic records study. Frailty was identified using the electronic frailty index. Primary care electronic health records of 89 996 adults with AF and CHA2DS2-Vasc score of ≥2 were linked with secondary care and mortality data in the Clinical Practice Research Database (CPRD) from 1 January 1998 to 30 November 2018. The primary outcome was a composite of death, stroke, systemic embolism, or major bleeding. Secondary outcomes were stroke, major bleeding, all-cause mortality, transient ischaemic attack, and falls. Of 89 996 participants, 71 256 (79.2%) were living with frailty. The prescription of OAC increased with degree of frailty. For patients not prescribed OAC, rates of the primary outcome increased alongside frailty category. Prescription of OAC was associated with a reduction in the primary outcome for each frailty category [adjusted hazard ratio, 95% confidence interval, no OAC as reference; fit: vitamin K antagonist (VKA) 0.69, 0.64-0.75, direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) 0.42, 0.33-0.53; mild frailty: VKA 0.52, 0.50-0.54, DOAC 0.57, 0.52-0.63; moderate: VKA 0.54, 0.52-0.56, DOAC 0.57, 0.52-0.63; severe: VKA 0.48, 0.45-0.51, DOAC 0.58, 0.52-0.65], with cumulative incidence function effects greater for DOAC than VKA.ConclusionFrailty among people with AF is common. The OAC was associated with a reduction in the primary endpoint across all degrees of frailty.
| S-EPMC9326851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/objectivesOral anticoagulation (OAC) is challenging in older patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who are often frail and have cognitive impairment. We examined the characteristics of older NVAF patients associated with higher odds of physical and cognitive impairments. We also examined if these high-risk patients have different OAC prescribing patterns and their satisfaction with treatment because it may impact optimal management of their NVAF.MethodsThe patients in the Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Elements in Atrial Fibrillation (SAGE-AF study cohort 2016-2018) had NVAF, were aged 65 and older, and eligible for the receipt of OAC. Measures included frailty (Fried Frailty scale), cognitive impairment (Montreal Cognitive Assessment Battery), OAC prescribing and type (direct oral anticoagulant [DOAC] or vitamin K antagonist [VKA]), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), bleeding, stroke risk, and treatment benefit (Anti-Clot Treatment Scale).ResultsPatients (n = 1,244) were 49% female, aged 76 (standard deviation = 7) years. A total of 14% were frail, and 42% had cognitive impairment. Frailty and cognitive impairment co-occurred in 9%. Odds of having both impairments versus none were higher with depression (odds ratio [OR] = 4.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.59-8.26), older age (OR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.29-1.88), lower education (OR = 3.81; 95%CI = 2.13-6.81), race/ethnicity other than non-Hispanic White (OR = 7.94; 95% CI = 4.34-14.55), bleeding risk (OR = 1.43; 95% CI = 1.12-1.81), and stroke risk (OR = 1.35; 95% CI = 1.13-1.62). OAC prescribing was not associated with CI and frailty status. Among patients taking OACs (85%), those with both impairments were more likely to take DOAC than VKA (OR = 1.69; 95% CI = 1.01-2.80). Having both impairments (OR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.08-3.27) or cognitive impairment (OR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.09-2.24) was associated with higher odds of reporting lower treatment benefit.ConclusionIn a large cohort of older NVAF patients, half were frail or cognitively impaired, and 9% had both impairments. We highlight the characteristics of patients who may benefit from cognitive and physical function screenings to maximize treatment and enhance prognosis. Finally, the co-occurrence of impairment was associated with low perceived benefit of treatment that may impede optimal management.
| S-EPMC8567309 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:While guidelines recommend anticoagulation for all atrial fibrillation (AF) patients ?75 years, evidence for the net clinical benefit (NCB) of anticoagulant in older adults is sparse. We sought to determine the association between age and NCB of anticoagulation in older adults with AF. METHODS AND RESULTS:We examined adults ?75 years with incident AF in the Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation-Cardiovascular Research Network cohort. Using a Markov state transition model, we estimated the lifetime NCB of warfarin and apixaban relative to no treatment in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). In the decision model, each month patients face a chance of stroke, hemorrhage, or death from a competing cause; the likelihood of each is a function of individual patients' stroke risk, hemorrhage risk, and life expectancy. We defined minimal clinically relevant lifetime benefit as 0.10 QALYs. In a sensitivity analysis, we examined the effect of competing risks of death on NCB using 2 models, one including competing risks and the second without competing risks. We included 14?946 patients, with a median age of 81 years and median CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4. In the main analysis, after age 87, NCB associated with warfarin decreased below 0.10 lifetime QALYs while NCB associated with apixaban did not decrease below 0.10 lifetime QALYs until after age 92. In sensitivity analyses, over a 3-year horizon, removing competing risks of death resulted in higher NCB (at 90 years, median difference using warfarin 0.010 QALYs [95% CI, 0.009-0.013], median difference using apixaban 0.025 QALYs [95% CI, 0.024-0.026]). CONCLUSIONS:The NCB of anticoagulation decreases with advancing age. The competing risk of death diminishes the NCB of anticoagulation for older patients with AF. Physicians should consider competing mortality risks when recommending anticoagulants to older adults with AF.
| S-EPMC7117790 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy is associated with increased periprocedural risks after cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. Patterns of anticoagulation management involving non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have not been characterized.HypothesisAnticoagulation strategies and outcomes differ by anticoagulant type in patients undergoing CIED implantation.MethodsUsing the nationwide Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation, we assessed how atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing CIED implantation were cared for and their subsequent outcomes. Outcomes were compared by oral anticoagulant therapy (none, warfarin, or NOAC) as well as by anticoagulation interruption status.ResultsAmong 9129 AF patients, 416 (5%) underwent CIED implantation during a median follow-up of 30 months (interquartile range, 24-36). Of these, 60 (14%) had implantation on a NOAC. Relative to warfarin therapy, those on a NOAC were younger (70.5 years [range, 65-77.5 years] vs 77 years [range, 70-82 years]), had less valvular heart disease (15.0% vs 31.3%), higher creatinine clearance (67.3 [range, 59.7-99.0] vs 65.8 [range, 50.0-91.6]), were more likely to have persistent AF (26.7% vs 22.9%), and use concomitant aspirin (51.7% vs 35.2%). OAC therapy was commonly interrupted for CIED in 64% (n = 183 of 284) of warfarin patients and 65% (n = 39 of 60) of NOAC patients. Many interrupted patients received intravenous bridging anticoagulation: 33/183 (18%) interrupted warfarin and 4/39 (10%) interrupted NOAC patients. Thirty-day periprocedure bleeding and stroke adverse events were infrequent.ConclusionsManagement of anticoagulation among AF patients undergoing CIED implantation is highly variable, with OAC being interrupted in more than half of both warfarin- and NOAC-treated patients. Bleeding and stroke events were infrequent in both warfarin and NOAC-treated patients.
| S-EPMC5638096 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cardiological societies recommend, in their guidelines, that patients with atrial fibrillation and an intermediate (or higher) risk of stroke and systemic embolization should be treated with oral anticoagulant drugs. For patients who do not have mitral valve stenosis or a mechanical valve prosthesis, non-vitamin-K dependent oral anticoagulants (NOAC) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for this purpose. It is unclear, however, whether patients with chronic kidney disease and atrial fibrillation benefit from oral anticoagulation to the same extent as those with normal kidney function. It is also unclear which of the two types of anti - coagulant drug is preferable for patients with chronic kidney disease; NOAC are, in part, renally eliminated. METHODS:This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective literature search, and on international guidelines. RESULTS:Current evidence suggests that patients with atrial fibrillation who have chronic kidney disease with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) above 15 mL/ min/1.73 m² should be treated with an oral anticoagulant drug if they have an at least intermediate risk of embolization, as assessed with the CHA2DS2-VASc score. For patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (GFR from 15 to 29 mL/ min/1.73 m²), however, this recommendation is based only on registry studies. For dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation, decisions whether to give oral anticoagulant drugs should be taken on an individual basis, in view of the elevated risk of hemorrhage and the unclear efficacy of such drugs in these patients. The subgroup analyses of the NOAC approval studies show that, for patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease with a creatinine clearance of >25-30 mL/min, NOAC should be given in preference to VKA, as long as the patient does not have mitral valve stenosis or a mechanical valve prosthesis. For those whose creatinine clearance is less than 25 mL/min, the relative merits of NOAC versus VKA are still debated. CONCLUSION:The cardiological societies' recommendation that patients with atrial fibrillation should be given oral anticoagulant drugs applies to the majority of such patients who also have chronic kidney disease.
| S-EPMC5974258 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:despite a large and growing population of older people with frailty and atrial fibrillation (AF), there is a lack of guidance on optimal AF management in this high-risk group. OBJECTIVE:to synthesise the existing evidence base on the association between frailty, AF and clinical outcomes. METHODS:a systematic review of studies examining the association between validated measures of frailty, AF and clinical outcomes, and meta-analysis of the association between frailty and oral anticoagulation (OAC) prescription. RESULTS:twenty studies (30,883 patients) were included, all observational. Fifteen were in hospital, four in the community, one in nursing care. Risk of bias was low-to-moderate. AF prevalence was 3%-38%. In people with AF, frailty was associated with increased stroke incidence, all-cause mortality, symptom severity and length of hospital stay.Meta-analysis of six studies showed frailty was associated with decreased OAC prescription at hospital admission (pooled adjusted OR 0.45 [95%CI 0.22-0.93], three studies), but not at discharge (pooled adjusted OR 0.40 [95%CI 0.13-1.23], three studies). A community-based study showed increased OAC prescription associated with frailty (OR 2.33 [95%CI 1.03-5.23]). CONCLUSION:frailty is common, and associated with adverse clinical outcomes in patients with AF. There is evidence of an association between frailty status and OAC prescription, with different direction of effect in community compared with hospital cohorts. Despite the majority of care for older people being provided in the community, there is a lack of evidence on the association between frailty, AF, anticoagulation and clinical outcomes to guide optimal care in this setting.
| S-EPMC6424377 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Backgroundthe prevalence of physical and multidimensional frailty and their prognostic impact on clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear.Objectiveto evaluated frailty in a cohort of patients with AF according to different criteria, and studied the prevalence and its prognostic impact on clinical outcomes.Methodsin this multicenter prospective cohort, 197 inpatients ≥ 65 years old with AF were recruited from September 2018 to April 2019.We used Fried Frailty phenotype (Fried) to assess physical frailty, and comprehensive geriatric assessment-frailty index (CGA-FI) to assess multidimensional frailty. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality or rehospitalization.Resultsthe prevalence of frailty was determined as 34.5% by Fried, 42.6% by CGA-FI. Malnutrition and ≥ 7 medications were independently associated with frailty. Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed that the presence of frailty by CGA-FI had significantly lower all-cause mortality or rehospitalization survival rate (log-rank P = 0.04) within 1 year. Multivariate Cox regression adjusted for age and sex showed that the frailty by CGA-FI was significantly associated with the risk of all-cause mortality or rehospitalization within 1 year (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.10-2.90). However, those associations were absent with the physical frailty. After broader multivariate adjustment, those associations were no longer statistically significant for both types of frailty.Conclusionsin older people with AF, Multidimensional frailty is more significantly associated with a composite of all-cause mortality or rehospitalization within 1 year than physical frailty, but these association are attenuated after multivariate adjustment.Clinical trial registrationChiCTR1800017204; date of registration: 07/18/2018.
| S-EPMC10537815 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are at increased thromboembolic risk, and they suffer more severe strokes with worse outcomes. Most thromboembolic complications of AF are eminently preventable with oral anticoagulation, and the increasing numbers of AF patients mean antithrombotic therapy is the most crucial management aspect of this common arrhythmia. Despite the proven efficacy of warfarin, a string of limitations have meant that it is underused by physicians and patients alike. This has prompted a search for new anticoagulants that could overcome many of the inconveniences of dose variability and anticoagulant monitoring associated with warfarin, but without sacrificing efficacy in thromboprophylaxis. The arrival of new oral anticoagulants has been complemented by improved risk stratification schemes, which permit clinicians to easily and reliably identify patients requiring anticoagulation and their bleeding risk. These advances in AF treatment will hopefully translate into improved outcomes for patients, especially as our experience with the new agents grows.
| S-EPMC4711491 | biostudies-other
Project description:AimsReports of long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) reveal highly variable, and generally suboptimal estimates of medication persistence. The objective of this review is to summarize current literature and highlight important methodological considerations for interpreting persistence research and designing studies of persistence on OAC treatment.Methods and resultsWe summarize differences in study methodology, setting, timing, treatment, and other factors associated with reports of better or worse persistence. For example, prospective compared with retrospective study designs are associated with higher reported persistence. Similarly, patient factors such as permanent AF or high stroke risk, and treatment with non-vitamin K oral antagonists relative to vitamin K antagonists are associated with higher persistence. Persistence has also been reported to be higher in Europe compared with North America and higher when the treating physician is a general practitioner compared with a specialist. We propose a framework for assessing and designing persistence studies. This framework includes aspects of patient selection, reliability and validity of measures, persistence definitions, clinical utility of measurements, follow-up periods, and analytic approaches.ConclusionsDifferences in study design, patient selection, treatments, and factors such as the countries/regions where studies are conducted or the type of treating physician may help explain the variability in OAC persistence estimates. A framework is proposed to assess persistence studies. This may have utility to compare and interpret published studies as well as for planning of future studies.
| S-EPMC8141301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The potential to save money within a short time frame provides a more compelling "business case" for quality improvement than merely demonstrating cost-effectiveness. Our objective was to demonstrate the potential for cost savings from improved control in patients anticoagulated for atrial fibrillation.Our population consisted of 67 077 Veterans Health Administration patients anticoagulated for atrial fibrillation between October 1, 2006, and September 30, 2008. We simulated the number of adverse events and their associated costs and utilities, both before and after various degrees of improvement in percent time in therapeutic range (TTR). The simulation had a 2-year time horizon, and costs were calculated from the perspective of the payer. In the base-case analysis, improving TTR by 5% prevented 1114 adverse events, including 662 deaths; it gained 863 quality-adjusted life-years and saved $15.9 million compared with the status quo, not accounting for the cost of the quality improvement program. Improving TTR by 10% prevented 2087 events, gained 1606 quality-adjusted life-years, and saved $29.7 million. In sensitivity analyses, costs were most sensitive to the estimated risk of stroke and the expected stroke reduction from improved TTR. Utilities were most sensitive to the estimated risk of death and the expected mortality benefit from improved TTR.A quality improvement program to improve anticoagulation control probably would be cost-saving for the payer, even if it were only modestly effective in improving control and even without considering the value of improved health. This study demonstrates how to make a business case for a quality improvement initiative.
| S-EPMC3967019 | biostudies-literature