Validation of CHA2DS2 VASc Score Predictability of Stroke and Systemic Embolization in a Middle Eastern Population with AF: The Jordan Atrial Fibrillation (JoFib) Study.

Background and Purpose: CHA2DS2-VASc score is one of the most widely used scoring systems to assess the risk of systemic embolization and stroke in patients suffering from atrial fibrillation (Afib); furthermore, it is important in guiding their treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the predictivity of this score in the Jordanian population, build a deeper understanding of patients' demographic and risk factors, and assess the usefulness of anticoagulation as a preventive measure. Methods: A total of 2020 patients with Afib registered in the Jordanian Atrial Fibrillation (JoFib) registry were enrolled in this study. All patients were followed up for 1 year to assess their susceptibility to develop cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and systemic embolism (SE). The association between CHA2DS2-VASc score and risk of development of stroke or systemic embolization was analyzed based on bivariate and adjusted multivariate analyses. The ROC curve was used to assess the predictivity of the CHA2DS2-VASc score. Results: The mean age of the study population was 67.8 years; 45.8% were males, and 81.8% were on anticoagulants. And, 71.8% had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of ≥3. During the follow-up period of 1 year; 69 developed new CVA (mean age, 72.8 years), and 9 developed SE. A total of 276 patients died; 18 patients died (6.5% out of all deceased)% from CVA. A moderate predictive power of the CHA2DS2-VASc score was demonstrated through ROC curve analysis with C statistics of 0.689 CI (0.634 to 0.744) for predicting the development of SE or CVA at 1 year. Conclusion: CHA2DS2-VASc showed a moderate predictivity of stroke, SE, and all-cause mortality at 1 year. The study suggested disregarding gender differences in deciding to initiate anticoagulant therapy.

The Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources: A Comparative Study From Jordan.

The allocation strategies during challenging situations among the different social groups is based on 9 principles which can be considered either individually: sickest first, waiting list, prognosis, youngest first, instrumental values, lottery, monetary contribution, reciprocity, and individual behavior, or in combination; youngest first and prognosis, for example. In this study, we aim to look into the most important prioritization principles amongst different groups in the Jordanian population, in order to facilitate the decision-making process for any potential medical crisis. We conducted an online survey that tackled how individuals would deal with three different scenarios of medical scarcity: (1) organ donation, (2) limited hospital beds during an influenza epidemic, and (3) allocation of novel therapeutics for lung cancer. In addition, a free-comment option was included at the end of the survey if respondents wished to contribute further. Seven hundred and fifty-four survey responses were gathered, including 372 males (49.3%), and 382 females (50.7%). Five groups of individuals were represented including religion scholars, physicians, medical students, allied health practitioners, and lay people. Of the five surveyed groups, four found "sickest-first" to be the most important prioritization principle in all three scenarios, and only the physicians group documented a disagreement. In the first scenario, physicians regarded "sickest-first" and "combined-criteria" to be of equal importance. In general, no differences were documented between the examined groups in comparison with lay people in the preference of options in all three scenarios; however, physicians were more likely to choose "combination" in both the second and third scenarios (OR 3.70, 95% CI 1.62-8.44, and 2.62, 95% CI 1.48-4.59; p < 0.01), and were less likely to choose "sickest-first" as the single most important prioritization principle (OR 0.57, CI 0.37-0.88, and 0.57; 95% CI 0.36-0.88; p < 0.01). Out of 100 free comments, 27 (27.0%) thought that the "social-value" of patients should also be considered, adding the 10th potential allocation principle. Our findings are concordant with literature in terms of allocating scarce medical resources. However, "social-value" appeared as an important principle that should be addressed when prioritizing scarce medical resources in Jordan.