Dataset Information

AIM-AF: A Physician Survey in the United States and Europe.

ABSTRACT: Background Guideline recommendations are the accepted reference for selection of therapies for rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study was designed to understand physicians' treatment practices and adherence to guidelines. Methods and Results The AIM-AF (Antiarrhythmic Medication for Atrial Fibrillation) study was an online survey of clinical cardiologists and electrophysiologists that was conducted in the United States and Europe (N=629). Respondents actively treated ≥30 patients with AF who received drug therapy, and had received or were referred for ablation every 3 months. The survey comprised 96 questions on physician demographics, AF types, and treatment practices. Overall, 54% of respondents considered guidelines to be the most important nonpatient factor influencing treatment choice. Across most queried comorbidities, amiodarone was selected by 60% to 80% of respondents. Other nonadherent usage included sotalol by 21% in patients with renal impairment; dofetilide initiation (16%, United States only) outside of hospital; class Ic agents by 6% in coronary artery disease; and dronedarone by 8% in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Additionally, rhythm control strategies were frequently chosen in asymptomatic AF (antiarrhythmic drugs [AADs], 35%; ablation, 8%) and subclinical AF (AADs, 38%; ablation, 13%). Despite guideline algorithms emphasizing safety first, efficacy (48%) was selected as the most important consideration for AAD choice, followed by safety (34%). Conclusions Despite surveyed clinicians recognizing the importance of guidelines, nonadherence was frequently observed. While deviation may be reasonable in selected patients, in general, nonadherence has the potential to compromise patient safety. These findings highlight an underappreciation of the safe use of AADs, emphasizing the need for interventions to support optimal AAD selection.

SUBMITTER: Camm AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9075271 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionMyasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare, debilitating, chronic disorder caused by the production of pathogenic immunoglobulin G autoantibodies against the neuromuscular junction. A lack of real-world studies in rare diseases reflects a relatively limited understanding of the significant unmet needs and burden of disease for patients. We aimed to provide comprehensive real-world insights into the management and burden of MG from treating physicians in the United States (US).MethodsData were collected using the Adelphi Real World MG Disease Specific Programme™, a point-in-time survey of physicians and their patients with MG, in the US between March and July 2020. Physician-reported clinical data, including demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, disease history, treatments, and healthcare resource utilization, were collected.ResultsIn total, 456 patient record forms were completed by 78 physicians based in the US. At time of survey completion, patient mean age was 54.5 years. Mean time from symptom onset to diagnosis was 9.0 months (n = 357). Ocular symptoms were reported in 71.7% of patients. General fatigue affected 47.1% of patients and over half of those reported the severity as moderate or severe (59.5%, n = 128). Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and/or steroids were the most frequently prescribed first-line treatment type among patients receiving treatment at time of survey completion and with moderate-to-severe symptoms (77.9%, n = 159/204). High-dose steroids (n = 14) and intravenous immunoglobulin (n = 13) were the most prescribed acute treatments among those receiving an acute treatment at time of survey completion (n = 36), with symptom exacerbations or myasthenic crises being the most common reasons for acute treatment. On average, 2.5 healthcare professionals were involved in patient management and 5.0 consultations were made per patient over the last 12 months.ConclusionsOur findings indicated that, despite treatment, there is a proportion of patients with MG in the US who had a significant need for improved disease management.

Project description:Sequential endocrine therapy (ET) is recommended for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) and without visceral symptoms. Chemotherapy (CT) can be considered after sequential ETs, but is associated with adverse side effects. We assessed physicians' preferences and self-reported prescribing patterns for ET and CT in the treatment of HR+/HER2- mBC at community practices in the United States. Community-based oncologists/hematologists from a nationwide online panel who treated postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC were invited to complete a survey, blinded to the identity of study sponsor. Treatment preferences were collected by treatment class of ET-based regimens versus CT and by agent for postmenopausal HR+/HER2- mBC patients after prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor use in the adjuvant or mBC setting. Among 213 physicians who completed the survey, 78% were male, 71% were based in small/intermediate practices (2-9 oncologists/subspecialists), 55% had >10 years of experience, and 58% referred to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines when treating mBC. Among first-line ETs, anastrozole was the most frequently used treatment (35%), followed by everolimus-based (EVE, 34%) and fulvestrant-based (FUL, 15%) therapy. After first-line ET, the most preferred second- and third-line treatments were ET monotherapy (48% and 39%), ET combination therapy (31% and 19%), and CT monotherapy (13% and 30%). Comparing EVE versus FUL, physicians preferred EVE in all lines but first line. Efficacy was the most important consideration for treatment choice. Physicians prescribed CT in early lines mainly because of visceral symptoms. This survey of treatment patterns for HR+/HER2- mBC in community practice suggested that after first-line ET, ET mono- or combination therapy was commonly used for the second- and third-line treatments and CT monotherapy for third- or later line treatments. CTs were used in early lines for patients with visceral symptoms.

Project description:BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to quantify the burden of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) with respect to health-related quality of life, work productivity and activity impairment, and healthcare resource utilization. METHODS: Data were obtained from the 2010 EU National Health and Wellness Survey (NHWS), which included participants from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK (5 EU, N = 57,805) as well as the 2010 US NHWS (N = 75,000). The NHWS is an annual, cross-sectional, self-administered Internet survey which employs a stratified random sampling frame to match the age and gender characteristics of the NHWS sample with known population statistics. Participants who self-reported a diagnosis of PAD were compared with participants who did not self-report a diagnosis of PAD on health-related quality of life (mental and physical component summary scores and health utilities from the Short Form-12v2), work productivity and activity impairment (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire), and healthcare resource use in terms of the number of physician visits, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations in the past six months through regression modeling adjusting for demographics and health characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 743 (1.29%) and 777 (1.04%) participants self-reported a diagnosis of PAD in the 5 EU and US, respectively. After adjusting for demographics and health characteristics, patients with PAD reported worse health-related quality of life, as measured by health utilities (5 EU: 0.66 vs. 0.70; US: 0.66 vs. 0.72; all p < .05), greater overall work impairment percentage (5 EU: 38.27% vs. 27.48%; US: 23.89% vs. 14.26%) and greater healthcare resource use compared to participants without PAD (all p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a significant burden for patients with PAD in both the 5 EU countries and the US with respect to both quality of life and economic outcomes. Improved management of these patients may have profound effects from both patient and societal perspectives.

Project description:BackgroundUncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTIs/acute cystitis) are among the most common infections in women worldwide. There are differences in uUTI treatment guidelines between countries and understanding the needs of physicians in diverse healthcare systems is important for developing new treatments. We performed a survey of physicians in the United States (US) and Germany to understand their perceptions of, and management approaches to uUTI.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional online survey of physicians in the US and Germany who were actively treating patients with uUTI (≥ 10 patients/month). Physicians were recruited via a specialist panel and the survey was piloted with 2 physicians (1 US, 1 Germany) prior to study commencement. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics.ResultsA total of 300 physicians were surveyed (n = 200 US, n = 100 Germany). Across countries and specialties, physicians estimated 16-43% of patients did not receive complete relief from initial therapy and 33-37% had recurrent infections. Urine culture and susceptibility testing was more common in the US and among urologists. The most commonly selected first-line therapy was trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole in the US (76%) and fosfomycin in Germany (61%). Ciprofloxacin was the most selected following multiple treatment failures (51% US, 45% Germany). Overall, 35% of US and 45% of German physicians agreed with the statement "I feel there is a good selection of treatment options" and ≥ 50% felt that current treatments provided good symptom relief. More than 90% of physicians included symptom relief amongst their top 3 treatment goals. The overall impact of symptoms on patients' lives was rated "a great deal" by 51% of US and 38% of German physicians, increasing with each treatment failure. Most physicians (> 80%) agreed that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is serious, but fewer (56% US, 46% Germany) had a high level of confidence in their knowledge of AMR.ConclusionsTreatment goals for uUTI were similar in the US and Germany, although with nuances to disease management approaches. Physicians recognized that treatment failures have a significant impact on patients' lives and that AMR is a serious problem, though many did not have confidence in their own knowledge of AMR.

Project description:IntroductionThe Understanding Psoriatic Disease Leveraging Insights for Treatment (UPLIFT) survey study was conducted globally in 2020 to understand how disease perceptions, including disease severity, treatment goals, and quality of life (QoL), have evolved recently, especially for mild-to-moderate psoriatic disease. Here, key findings from the UPLIFT survey based on respondents located in the US are presented. Leveraging results from the UPLIFT survey could lead to more effective interactions between patients and physicians and greater patient satisfaction.MethodsUPLIFT was a multinational web-based survey of dermatologists, rheumatologists, and patients who self-reported a healthcare provider diagnosis of psoriasis (PsO) and/or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) conducted from March 2, 2020, to June 3, 2020.ResultsUS respondents included 1006 patients (26.4% of global population; PsO only, n = 535; PsA only, n = 72; PsO and PsA, n = 399) and 216 physicians (dermatologists, n = 115; rheumatologists, n = 101). Most patients (66.4%) reported a body surface area (BSA; assessed by number of palms) of ≤ 3; of these, 56.2% rated their disease as moderate or severe. Most patients with PsO felt they were somewhat (40.1%) or very (49.3%) closely aligned with their dermatologists regarding treatment goals. Alternately, most patients with PsA felt that they were not too closely (32.1%) or not at all (59.3%) aligned with their rheumatologists. Most patients reported either a moderate (PsO, 35.5%; PsA, 31.8%) or strong (PsO, 47.7%; PsA, 53.9%) need for better treatments. Across BSA subgroups, most patients (60.8% to 86.1%) had a Dermatology Life Quality Index score ≥ 6, indicating at least a moderately impacted QoL.ConclusionsDespite more treatment options, management of psoriatic disease remains suboptimal, with many patients reporting moderate-to-severe disease and impaired QoL, even with limited skin involvement. Results further suggest an unmet need for alignment between patients and physicians in the US to optimize the management of PsO and PsA.

Project description:PurposePhysician-scientists have long been considered an endangered species, and their extended training pathway is vulnerable to disruptions. This study investigated the effects of COVID-19-related challenges on the personal lives, career activities, stress levels, and research productivity of physician-scientist trainees and faculty.MethodThe authors surveyed medical students (MS), graduate students (GS), residents/fellows (R/F), and faculty (F) using a tool distributed to 120 U.S. institutions with MD-PhD programs in April-June 2020. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare differences between groups. Machine learning was employed to select variables for multivariate logistic regression analyses aimed at identifying factors associated with stress and impaired productivity.ResultsThe analyses included 1,929 respondents (MS: n = 679, 35%; GS: n = 676, 35%; R/F: n = 274, 14%; F: n = 300, 16%). All cohorts reported high levels of social isolation, stress from effects of the pandemic, and negative impacts on productivity. R/F and F respondents were more likely than MS and GS respondents to report financial difficulties due to COVID-19. R/F and F respondents with a dual degree expressed more impaired productivity compared with those without a dual degree. Multivariate regression analyses identified impacted research/scholarly activities, financial difficulties, and social isolation as predictors of stress and impaired productivity for both MS and GS cohorts. For both R/F and F cohorts, impacted personal life and research productivity were associated with stress, while dual-degree status, impacted research/scholarly activities, and impacted personal life were predictors of impaired productivity. More female than male respondents reported increased demands at home.ConclusionsThis national survey of physician-scientist trainees and faculty found a high incidence of stress and impaired productivity related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the challenges faced and their consequences may improve efforts to support the physician-scientist workforce in the postpandemic period.

Dataset Information

AIM-AF: A Physician Survey in the United States and Europe.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets