COVID-19 pandemic and trends in clinical outcomes and medication use for patients with established atrial fibrillation: A nationwide analysis of claims data.

Study objective: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted multiple aspects of the health care system, including the diagnosis and control of chronic conditions. This study aimed to quantify pandemic-related changes in the rates of clinical events among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Design/setting/participants: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified individuals with established AF at any time before 2019 using de-identified Optum's Clinformatics® Data Mart, and followed them from 3/18/2019 to death, or disenrollment, or the end of the study (09/30/2021). Main outcome: Rates of clinical event, including all-cause hospitalization, ischemic stroke, and bleeding. We constructed interrupted time series to test changes in outcomes after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (3/11/2020, date of pandemic declaration). We then identified the first month after the start of the pandemic in which outcomes returned to pre-pandemic levels. Results: A total of 561,758 patients, with a mean age of 77 ± 9.9 years, were included in the study. The monthly incidence rate of all-cause hospitalization decreased from 2.8 % in the period immediately before the pandemic declaration to 1.7 % in the period immediately after, with p-value for level change<0.001. The rate of new ischemic stroke diagnoses decreased from 0.28 % in the period immediately before pandemic declaration to 0.20 % in the period immediately after, and the rate of major bleeding diagnoses from 0.81 % to 0.59 %, both p-values for level change<0.01. The incidence rate of ischemic stroke and bleeding events returned to pre-pandemic levels in October and November 2020, respectively. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a decrease in health care visits for ischemic stroke and bleeding in a nationwide cohort of patients with established AF.

Facility-Level Variation in Racial Disparities in Anticoagulation for Atrial Fibrillation: The REACH-AF Study.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulation reduces stroke risk for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Prior research demonstrates lower anticoagulant prescribing in Black than in White individuals but few studies have examined racial differences in facility-level anticoagulant prescribing for AF. OBJECTIVE: To assess variation in anticoagulant initiation by race within Veterans Health Administration (VA) facilities. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Black and White patients enrolled in the VA with incident AF from 2020 through 2021. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was rate of any anticoagulant initiation (i.e., warfarin or direct oral anticoagulant [DOAC]) or any DOAC therapy within 90 days of an AF diagnosis, overall and for Black and White patients at each facility. We also estimated the adjusted Black-White risk difference. KEY RESULTS: In 82 VA facilities serving 26,832 Black and White patients, overall unadjusted rates of any anticoagulant therapy ranged from 56.8 to 87.1% across facilities; the corresponding ranges for Black and White patients were 47.6 to 91.3% and 58.2 to 87.1%, respectively. Overall unadjusted rates of DOAC therapy ranged from 55.1 to 85.5% by facility; ranges for Black and White patients were 42.8 to 86.9% and 56.4 to 85.5%, respectively. The adjusted risk difference between Black and White patients ranged from - 29.9 (95% CI, - 54.9 to - 4.8) to 14.2 (95% CI, - 9.1 to 25.0) across facilities for any anticoagulant therapy and from - 28.8 (95% CI, - 58.3 to 0.8) to 15.0 (95% CI, - 8.0 to 38.1) for DOAC therapy. For any anticoagulant therapy there were 3 facilities where prescribing was statistically higher in White than Black patients; for DOAC therapy there were 5 such facilities. CONCLUSIONS: In a national cohort of patients with AF, we observed large facility-level variation and adjusted risk differences in any anticoagulant and DOAC initiation, overall and by race. These findings represent a target for local quality improvement in AF care.

Trends and site-level variation of novel cardiovascular medication utilization among patients admitted for heart failure or coronary artery disease in the US Veterans Affairs System: 2017-2021.

BACKGROUND: We assessed trends in novel cardiovascular medication utilization in US Veterans Affairs (VA) for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 Inhibitors (SGLT2i), and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA). METHODS: We retrospectively identified cohorts from 114 VA hospitals with admission for prevalent 1) systolic heart failure (HF, N = 82,375) or 2) coronary artery disease and diabetes (CAD+T2D, N = 74,209). Site-level data for prevalent filled prescriptions were assessed at hospital admission, discharge, or within 6 months of discharge. Variability among sites was estimated with median odds ratios (mOR), and within-site Pearson correlations of utilization of each medication class were calculated. Site- and patient-level characteristics were compared by high-, mixed-, and low-utilizing sites. RESULTS: ARNI and SGTL2i use for HF increased from <5% to 20% and 21%, respectively, while SGTL2i or GLP-1 RA use for CAD+T2D increased from <5% to 30% from 2017 to 2021. Adjusted mOR and 95% confidence intervals for ARNI, SGTL2i for HF, and SGTL2i or GLP-1 RA for CAD+T2D were 1.73 (1.64-1.91), 1.72 (1.59-1.81), and 1.53 (1.45-1.62), respectively. Utilization of each medication class correlated poorly with use of other novel classes (Pearson <0.38 for all). Higher patient volume, number of beds, and hospital complexity correlated with high-utilizing sites. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of novel medications has increased over time but remains suboptimal for US Veterans with HF and CAD+T2D, with substantial site-level heterogeneity despite a universal medication formulary and low out-of-pocket costs for patients. Future work should include further characterization of hospital- and clinician-level practice patterns to serve as targets to increase implementation.

Trends in Drug Spending of Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation, 2014-2021.

INTRODUCTION: This study documents cost trends in oral anticoagulants (OAC) in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. METHODS: Using MarketScan databases, the mean annual patients' out-of-pocket costs, insurance payments, and the proportion of patients initiating OAC within 90 days from atrial fibrillation diagnosis were calculated from July 2014 to June 2021. Costs of OACs (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin) and the payments by three insurance types (commercial payers, Medicare, and Medicaid) were calculated. Patients' out-of-pocket costs and insurance payments were adjusted to 2021 prices. Joinpoint regression models were used to test trends of outcomes and average annual percent changes (AAPC) were reported. Data analyses were performed in 2022-2023. RESULTS: From July 2014 to June 2021, the mean annual out-of-pocket costs of any OAC increased for commercial insurance (AAPC 3.0%) and Medicare (AAPC 5.1%) but decreased for Medicaid (AAPC -3.3%). The mean annual insurance payments for any OAC significantly increased for all insurance groups (AAPC 13.1% [95% CI 11.3-15.0] for Medicare; AAPC 11.8% [95% CI 8.0-15.6] for commercial insurance; and AAPC 16.3% [95% CI 11.3-21.4] for Medicaid). The initiation of any OAC increased (AAPC 7.3% for commercial insurance; AAPC 10.2% for Medicare; AAPC 5.3% for Medicaid). CONCLUSIONS: There was a substantial increase in the overall cost burden of OACs and OAC initiation rates in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in 2014-2021; these findings provide insights into the current and anticipated impact of rising drug prices on patients' and payers' financial burden.

COVID-19 pandemic and initiation of treatment for atrial fibrillation: a nationwide analysis of claims data.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly disrupted the delivery of medical care. It remains unclear whether individuals diagnosed with new onset disease during the pandemic were less likely to initiate treatments after diagnosis. We sought to evaluate changes in the treatment initiation of patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AF) after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified individuals with incident AF from 01/01/2016-09/30/2021 using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database. The primary outcome was initiation of oral anticoagulation (OAC) within 30 days of AF diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included initiation of OAC within 180 days of diagnosis, initiation of warfarin, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), rhythm control medications and electrical cardioversion within 30 days of diagnosis. We constructed interrupted time series analyses to examine changes in the outcomes following the onset of the pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 573,524 patients (age 73.0 ± 10.9 years) were included in the study. There were no significant changes in the initiation of OAC, DOAC, and rhythm control medications associated with the onset of the pandemic. There was a significant decrease in initiation of electrical cardioversion associated with the onset of the pandemic. The rate of electronic cardioversion within 30 days of diagnosis decreased by 4.9% per 1,000 patients after the onset of the pandemic and decreased by about 35% in April 2020, compared to April 2019, from 5.53% to 3.58%. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic did not affect the OAC initiation within 30 days of AF diagnosis but was associated with a decline in the provision of procedures for patients newly diagnosed with AF.

Eliminating Health Disparities in Atrial Fibrillation, Heart Failure, and Dyslipidemia: A Path Toward Achieving Pharmacoequity.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pharmacoequity refers to the goal of ensuring that all patients have access to high-quality medications, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, or other characteristics. The goal of this article is to review current evidence on disparities in access to cardiovascular drug therapies across sociodemographic subgroups, with a focus on heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and dyslipidemia. RECENT FINDINGS: Considerable and consistent disparities to life-prolonging heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and dyslipidemia medications exist in clinical trial representation, access to specialist care, prescription of guideline-based therapy, drug affordability, and pharmacy accessibility across racial, ethnic, gender, and other sociodemographic subgroups. Researchers, health systems, and policy makers can take steps to improve pharmacoequity by diversifying clinical trial enrollment, increasing access to inpatient and outpatient cardiology care, nudging clinicians to increase prescription of guideline-directed medical therapy, and pursuing system-level reforms to improve drug access and affordability.

Cost-Related Barriers and Ensuring Equitable Access to Vaccines in the US.

This Viewpoint discusses policies toward increasing access to effective COVID-19 vaccines, advancing vaccine equity, strengthening reimbursement policies, and increasing federal incentives for insurers and health systems to improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

Diversifying the Medical Pathway in a Post-Affirmative Action World.

This Viewpoint discusses a pathway toward individual, institutional, professional, and societal actions to increase the number of underrepresented individuals in medicine within the medical workforce in a "post­affirmative action" landscape.

Weighted Lottery to Equitably Allocate Scarce Supply of COVID-19 Monoclonal Antibody.

Importance: Equitable allocation of scarce medications is an important health policy goal. There are few data about attempts to achieve equitable allocation in the community setting. Objective: To describe the development and use of a weighted lottery to allocate a scarce supply of tixagevimab with cilgavimab as preexposure prophylaxis to COVID-19 for immunocompromised individuals and examine whether this promoted equitable allocation to disadvantaged populations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study analyzed a weighted lottery process from December 8, 2021, to February 23, 2022, that assigned twice the odds of drug allocation of 450 tixagevimab with cilgavimab doses to individuals residing in highly disadvantaged neighborhoods according to the US Area Deprivation Index (ADI) in a 35-hospital system in Pennsylvania, New York, and Maryland. In all, 10 834 individuals were eligible for the lottery. Weighted lottery results were compared with 10 000 simulated unweighted lotteries in the same cohort performed after drug allocation occurred. Main Outcomes: Proportion of individuals from disadvantaged neighborhoods and Black individuals who were allocated and received tixagevimab with cilgavimab. Results: Of the 10 834 eligible individuals, 1800 (16.6%) were from disadvantaged neighborhoods and 767 (7.1%) were Black. Mean (SD) age was 62.9 (18.8) years, and 5471 (50.5%) were women. A higher proportion of individuals from disadvantaged neighborhoods was allocated the drug in the ADI-weighted lottery compared with the unweighted lottery (29.1% vs 16.6%; P < .001). The proportion of Black individuals allocated the drug was greater in the weighted lottery (9.1% vs 7.1%; P < .001). Among the 450 individuals allocated tixagevimab with cilgavimab in the ADI-weighted lottery, similar proportions of individuals from disadvantaged neighborhoods accepted the allocation and received the drug compared with those from other neighborhoods (27.5% vs 27.9%; P = .93). However, Black individuals allocated the drug were less likely to receive it compared with White individuals (3 of 41 [7.3%] vs 118 of 402 [29.4%]; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this quality improvement study suggest an ADI-weighted lottery process to allocate scarce resources is feasible in a large health system and resulted in more drug allocation to and receipt of drug by individuals who reside in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Although the ADI-weighted lottery also resulted in more drug allocation to Black individuals compared with an unweighted process, they were less likely to accept allocation and receive it compared with White individuals. Further strategies are needed to ensure that Black individuals receive scarce medications allocated.

Lifetime healthcare expenses across demographic and cardiovascular risk groups: The application of a novel modeling strategy in a large multiethnic cohort study.

Objective: To understand the burden of healthcare expenses over the lifetime of individuals and evaluate differences among those with cardiovascular risk factors and among disadvantaged groups based on race/ethnicity and sex. Methods: We linked data from the longitudinal multiethnic Dallas Heart Study, which recruited participants between 2000 and 2002, with inpatient and outpatient claims from all hospitals in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex through December 2018, capturing encounter expenses. Race/ethnicity and sex, as well as five risk factors, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, smoking, and overweight/obesity, were defined at cohort enrollment. For each individual, expenses were indexed to age and cumulated between 40 and 80 years of age. Lifetime expenses across exposures were evaluated as interactions in generalized additive models. Results: A total of 2184 individuals (mean age, 45±10 years; 61% women, 53% Black) were followed between 2000 and 2018. The mean modeled lifetime cumulative healthcare expenses were $442,629 (IQR, $423,850 to $461,408). In models that included 5 risk factors, Black individuals had $21,306 higher lifetime healthcare spending compared with non-Black individuals (P < .001), and men had modestly higher expenses than women ($5987, P < .001). Across demographic groups, the presence of risk factors was associated with progressively higher lifetime expenses, with significant independent association of diabetes ($28,075, P < .001), overweight/obesity ($8816, P < .001), smoking ($3980, P = .009), and hypertension ($528, P = .02) with excess spending. Conclusion: Our study suggests Black individuals have higher lifetime healthcare expenses, exaggerated by the substantially higher prevalence of risk factors, with differences emerging in older age.

Historical Redlining, Socioeconomic Distress, and Risk of Heart Failure Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: The association of historical redlining policies, a marker of structural racism, with contemporary heart failure (HF) risk among White and Black individuals is not well established. METHODS: We aimed to evaluate the association of redlining with the risk of HF among White and Black Medicare beneficiaries. Zip code-level redlining was determined by the proportion of historically redlined areas using the Mapping Inequality Project within each zip code. The association between higher zip code redlining proportion (quartile 4 versus quartiles 1-3) and HF risk were assessed separately among White and Black Medicare beneficiaries using generalized linear mixed models adjusted for potential confounders, including measures of the zip code-level Social Deprivation Index. RESULTS: A total of 2 388 955 Medicare beneficiaries (Black n=801 452; White n=1 587 503; mean age, 71 years; men, 44.6%) were included. Among Black beneficiaries, living in zip codes with higher redlining proportion (quartile 4 versus quartiles 1-3) was associated with increased risk of HF after adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities (risk ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.04-1.12]; P<0.001). This association remained significant after further adjustment for area-level Social Deprivation Index (risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.002-1.08]; P=0.04). A significant interaction was observed between redlining proportion and Social Deprivation Index (Pinteraction<0.01) such that higher redlining proportion was significantly associated with HF risk only among socioeconomically distressed regions (above the median Social Deprivation Index). Among White beneficiaries, redlining was associated with a lower risk of HF after adjustment for age, sex, and comorbidities (risk ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.89-0.99]; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Historical redlining is associated with an increased risk of HF among Black patients. Contemporary zip code-level social determinants of health modify the relationship between redlining and HF risk, with the strongest relationship between redlining and HF observed in the most socioeconomically disadvantaged communities.

Association of Prescription Co-payment With Adherence to Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitor Therapies in Patients With Heart Failure and Diabetes.

Importance: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and heart failure (HF) prevalence are rising in the US. Although glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) improve outcomes for these conditions, high out-of-pocket costs may be associated with reduced medication adherence. Objective: To compare 1-year adherence to GLP1-RA and SGLT2i therapies by prescription co-payment level in individuals with T2D and/or HF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used deidentified data from Optum Insight's Clinformatics Data Mart Database of enrollees with commercial and Medicare health insurance plans. Individuals aged 18 years or older with T2D and/or HF who had a prescription claim for a GLP1-RA or SLGT2i from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2020, were included. Exposures: Prescription co-payment, categorized as low (<$10), medium ($10 to<$50), and high (≥$50). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was medication adherence, defined as a proportion of days covered (PDC) of 80% or greater at 1 year. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association between co-payment and adherence, adjusting for patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and socioeconomic factors. Results: A total of 94 610 individuals (mean [SD] age, 61.8 [11.4] years; 51 226 [54.1%] male) were prescribed GLP1-RA or SGLT2i therapy. Overall, 39 149 individuals had a claim for a GLP1-RA, of whom 25 557 (65.3%) had a PDC of 80% or greater at 1 year. In fully adjusted models, individuals with a medium (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.58-0.67) or high (AOR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.44-0.51) co-payment were less likely to have a PDC of 80% or greater with a GLP1-RA compared with those with a low co-payment. Overall, 51 072 individuals had a claim for an SGLT2i, of whom 37 339 (73.1%) had a PDC of 80% or greater at 1 year. Individuals with a medium (AOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.63-0.72) or high (AOR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.63-0.72) co-payment were less likely to have a PDC of 80% or greater with an SGLT2i compared with those with a low co-payment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of individuals with T2D and/or HF, 1-year adherence to GLP1-RA or SGLT2i therapies was highest among individuals with a low co-payment. Improving adherence to guideline-based therapies may require interventions that reduce out-of-pocket prescription costs.

Racial disparities in access to health care infrastructure across US counties: A geographic information systems analysis.

Infrastructure system in the U.S. have been shown to be linked to social and health inequities. We calculated driving distance to the closest health care facility for a representative sample of the U.S. population using ArcGIS Network Analyst and a national transportation dataset, and identified areas where Black residents have a longer driving distance to the closest facility than White residents. Our data demonstrated that racial disparities in access to health care facilities presented large geographic variation. Counties with significant racial disparities were concentrated in the Southeast and did not correspond to counties with a greater proportion of the overall population >5 miles to the closest facility, which were concentrated in the Midwest. This geographic variation demonstrates the need to adopt a spatially explicit data driven approach in the design of equitable health care facility establishment that address the specific limitations of the local infrastructure.

Out-of-Pocket Drug Costs for Medicare Beneficiaries With Cardiovascular Risk Factors Under the Inflation Reduction Act.

BACKGROUND: High out-of-pocket prescription drug costs contribute to financial toxicity, medication nonadherence, and adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. Policymakers recently passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which will cap Medicare out-of-pocket drug costs at $2,000/year and expand full low-income subsidies (LIS). It is unclear how these provisions will affect Medicare beneficiaries with CV risk factors and/or conditions. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to characterize the population of Medicare beneficiaries with CV risk factors/conditions experiencing out-of-pocket prescription drug costs >$2,000/year and estimate their potential savings under the Inflation Reduction Act's spending cap; identify sociodemographic characteristics associated with out-of-pocket costs >$2,000/year; and characterize beneficiaries newly eligible for LIS under the Inflation Reduction Act. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years with ≥1 CV risk factor/condition from 2016 to 2019. RESULTS: An annual estimated 34,056,335 ± 855,653 Medicare beneficiaries (mean ± SE) had ≥1 CV risk factor/condition, of whom 1,020,484 ± 77,055 experienced out-of-pocket drug costs >$2,000/year. The likelihood of experiencing out-of-pocket drug costs >$2,000/year was lower among adults ≥75 years vs 65 to 74 years (adjusted OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49-0.93) and for low-income vs higher-income adults. Among beneficiaries currently spending >$2,000/year, estimated median out-of-pocket drug savings would be $855/year and total annual savings $1,723,031,307 ± $91,150,609 under the Inflation Reduction Act. An estimated 1,289,861 beneficiaries would also become newly eligible for LIS. CONCLUSIONS: More than 1 million older adults with CV risk factors and/or conditions spend >$2,000/year out-of-pocket on prescription drugs and will likely benefit from the Inflation Reduction Act's cap, with estimated total out-of-pocket savings of $1.7 billion/year, while another 1.3 million will also become newly eligible for LIS.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Barriers Faced by Medical College Admission Test Examinees and Their Association With Medical School Application and Matriculation.

Importance: There has been disappointing progress in enrollment of medical students from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in medicine, including American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic students. Barriers that may influence students interested in medicine are understudied. Objective: To examine racial and ethnic differences in barriers faced by students taking the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used survey data (surveys administered between January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018) from MCAT examinees linked with application and matriculation data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Data analyses were performed from November 1, 2021, to January 31, 2023. Main Variables and Outcomes: Main outcomes were medical school application and matriculation. Key independent variables reflected parental educational level, financial and educational barriers, extracurricular opportunities, and interpersonal discrimination. Results: The sample included 81 755 MCAT examinees (0.3% American Indian or Alaska Native, 21.3% Asian, 10.1% Black, 8.0% Hispanic, and 60.4% White; 56.9% female). There were racial and ethnic differences in reported barriers. For example, after adjustment for demographic characteristics and examination year, 39.0% (95% CI, 32.3%-45.8%) of American Indian or Alaska Native examinees, 35.1% (95% CI, 34.0%-36.2%) of Black examinees, and 46.6% (95% CI, 45.4%-47.9%) of Hispanic examinees reported having no parent with a college degree compared with 20.4% (95% CI, 20.0%-20.8%) of White examinees. After adjustment for demographic characteristics and examination year, Black examinees (77.8%; 95% CI, 76.9%-78.7%) and Hispanic examinees (71.3%; 95% CI, 70.2%-72.4%) were less likely than White examinees (80.2%; 95% CI, 79.8%-80.5%) to apply to medical school. Black examinees (40.6%; 95% CI, 39.5%-41.7%) and Hispanic examinees (40.2%; 95% CI, 39.0%-41.4%) were also less likely than White examinees (45.0%; 95% CI, 44.6%-45.5%) to matriculate at medical school. Examined barriers were associated with a lower likelihood of medical school application and matriculation (eg, examinees having no parent with a college degree had lower odds of applying [odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.61-0.69] and matriculating [odds ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.59-0.66]). Black-White and Hispanic-White disparities in application and matriculation were largely accounted for by differences in these barriers. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of MCAT examinees, American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic students reported lower parental educational levels, greater educational and financial barriers, and greater discouragement from prehealth advisers than White students. These barriers may deter groups underrepresented in medicine from applying to and matriculating at medical school.

Race, ethnicity, sex, and socioeconomic disparities in anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation: A narrative review of contemporary literature.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia in the United States and is responsible for 1 in 7 ischemic strokes. While anticoagulation is effective at preventing strokes, prior work has highlighted significant disparities in anticoagulation prescribing. Furthermore, racial, ethnic, sex, and socioeconomic disparities in AF outcomes have been described. As such, we aimed to review recent data on disparities with respect to anticoagulation for AF published between January 2018 and February 2021. The search string consisted of 7 phrases that combined AF, anticoagulation, and disparities involving sex, race, ethnicity, income, socioeconomic status (SES), and access to care and identified 13 relevant articles. The aggregate data demonstrated that Black patients were less likely to be prescribed anticoagulation than patients of other racial/ethnic groups. Additionally, Black patients were more likely to be prescribed warfarin instead of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) despite evidence that DOACs are safer and better tolerated. Lower-income patients and patients with less education were also less likely to receive DOACs. Some studies found that women were less likely to be anticoagulated than men even when their estimated stroke risk was higher, although other studies did not show sex-based differences. Building upon prior work, our study demonstrates that racial and ethnic disparities have persisted in the management of AF. Additionally, we our work highlights that there are significant disparities in anticoagulation management for AF associated with sex, income, and education. More work is needed to identify mechanisms for these disparities and identify potential solutions to achieve pharmacoequity.