RESUMO
Background: Anticoagulation is the cornerstone of atrial fibrillation (AF) management for stroke prevention. Recently, we showed that oral anticoagulation (OAC) rates of AF patients in a large U.S. multispecialty health system are >80%. Objective: The purpose of this study was to improve OAC rates in AF patients via an educational intervention targeted to primary care providers with low OAC rates. Methods: Primary care clinicians were stratified by proportions of their AF patients at elevated stroke risk not taking anticoagulation medication. Clinicians with the lowest rates of anticoagulation were assigned to a target group receiving an educational program consisting of E-mail messaging summarizing anticoagulation guidelines. All other clinicians were assigned to a comparison group (CG). Data from a 6-month lead-in phase were compared with a 6-month follow-up period to determine whether the proportion of AF patients treated with OACs had changed. Results: Of the 141 primary care clinicians with patients who met the inclusion criteria, 36 (25.53%) were assigned to the educational group (EG) and 105 (74.47%) to the CG. At baseline, there was a significant difference in percent of high-risk AF patients who were untreated in the EG (20.65%) compared to the high-risk patients who were untreated in the CG (13.64%; P = .001). After the educational intervention, high-risk AF patients without anticoagulation decreased in both EG (15.47%; P = .047) and CG (10.14%; P = .07), with greater absolute reduction in the EG (5.19% vs 3.50%). Conclusion: A targeted education program was associated with increased anticoagulation rates for AF patients at high risk for stroke.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation is a cornerstone in atrial fibrillation (AF) management for stroke prevention. Studies showed that oral anticoagulants (OAC), previously limited to warfarin, were underused. Recently, non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have seen widespread adoption, but it has not been well studied whether there has been a subsequent increase in OAC usage in AF patients. METHODS: We quantified OAC rates in AF patients in a large multispecialty health system in the Northeast United States. A total of 351,795 patients seen in the network over the preceding 18 months were reviewed. RESULTS: Of these patients, 8727 (2.5%) carried a diagnosis of AF, and, of the 6933 patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2 or higher, 5576 (80.4%) had an OAC listed as an active medication or had received a left atrial appendage occlusion device. Of the 6605 patients treated with an OAC, 5308 (80.4%) were treated with a NOAC and 1295 (19.6%) were prescribed warfarin. A higher percentage of patients with CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2 who had seen a cardiologist were treated with an OAC vs. those who had not seen a cardiologist in the prior 18 months (83.95% vs. 67.43%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We show dramatically increased OAC usage among patients with AF and that NOACs comprise the large majority of OACs compared with previous studies. This suggests an association between widespread adoption of NOACs and increased oral anticoagulation rates. Future directions include assessing barriers to oral anticoagulation and developing interventions to reduce disparity in OAC use between clinics.