Shared Decision Making in Cardiac Electrophysiology Procedures and Arrhythmia Management

Implementation of a Patient Decision Aid for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Improves Patient Procedural Knowledge but Does Not Impact Perceived Involvement With the Shared Decision-Making Process

Purpose

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a method for a patient and physician to cooperatively consider a diagnostic or therapeutic option, ultimately empowering the patient to make an informed decision. Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is a procedure that would benefit from SDM given the risk of serious adverse events, the high rate of arrhythmia recurrence, and alternative treatment options. Implementing a patient decision aid (PDA) may help facilitate AF ablation SDM by succinctly conveying important information to patients.

Methods

Patients scheduled for initial AF catheter ablation were randomized to a virtual SDM visit utilizing a PDA, which covered procedural risks and benefits, or a virtual control visit with a tool outlining periprocedural processes. Preoperatively, patients completed a questionnaire assessing procedural risk and benefit knowledge, as well as perceived involvement with the decision-making process. Unpaired t-tests were used to compare groups.

Results

The SDM group scored significantly better overall on knowledge-based questions compared to the control group (69% correct [n=34] vs 53% [n=32]; P=0.00013). In particular, the SDM group was significantly more likely to answer questions correctly about stroke risk (P=0.01), anticoagulation (P=0.01), and potential need for additional procedures (P=0.03 and P=0.03). Perceived involvement in the decision-making process was overall not improved with PDA use (4.7 vs 4.6 out of 5; P=0.72).

Conclusions

The addition of a PDA for AF ablation significantly improved procedural knowledge but did not impact patients' perceived involvement in the decision-making process compared to traditional preprocedural discussion alone.

JACC: Advances Expert Panel Perspective: Shared Decision-Making in Multidisciplinary Team-Based Cardiovascular Care

Shared decision-making (SDM) and multidisciplinary team-based care delivery are recommended across several cardiology clinical practice guidelines. However, evidence for benefit and guidance on implementation are limited. Informed consent, the use of patient decision aids, or the documentation of these elements for governmental or societal agencies may be conflated as SDM. SDM is a bidirectional exchange between experts: patients are the experts on their goals, values, and preferences, and clinicians provide their expertise on clinical factors. In this Expert Panel perspective, we review the current state of SDM in team-based cardiovascular care and propose best practice recommendations for multidisciplinary team implementation of SDM.

Shared decision making for participation in elite athletes with cardiovascular conditions. Where are we now?

Sudden Cardiac Death is a leading medical cause of death in athletes of all ages. Recently there has been a shift from an authoritarian approach to that of using a Shared Decision Making (SDM) model in eligibility decisions of athletes with cardiovascular decisions. SDM in elite athletics can be complex and collaboration amongst the athlete, family, physicians, athletic trainers, and institutional stakeholders is critical. SDM acknowledges the complexities of a collaboration between sports cardiologists bringing disease and sport-specific expertise, and team physicians, in complementary fashion to integrate medical knowledge, clinical uncertainty, athlete and family values, and institutional philosophies and risk tolerance.

Use of digital patient decision-support tools for atrial fibrillation treatments: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of digital patient decision-support tools for atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment decisions in adults with AF.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated digital patient decision-support tools for AF treatment decisions in adults with AF.

INFORMATION SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus from 2005 to 2023.Risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment: We assessed RoB using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 for RCTs and cluster RCT and the ROBINS-I tool for quasi-experimental studies.

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

We used random effects meta-analysis to synthesise decisional conflict and patient knowledge outcomes reported in RCTs. We performed narrative synthesis for all outcomes. The main outcomes of interest were decisional conflict and patient knowledge.

RESULTS

13 articles, reporting on 11 studies (4 RCTs, 1 cluster RCT and 6 quasi-experimental) met the inclusion criteria. There were 2714 participants across all studies (2372 in RCTs), of which 26% were women and the mean age was 71 years. Socioeconomically disadvantaged groups were poorly represented in the included studies. Seven studies (n=2508) focused on non-valvular AF and the mean CHAD2DS2-VASc across studies was 3.2 and for HAS-BLED 1.9. All tools focused on decisions regarding thromboembolic stroke prevention and most enabled calculation of individualised stroke risk. Tools were heterogeneous in features and functions; four tools were patient decision aids. The readability of content was reported in one study. Meta-analyses showed a reduction in decisional conflict (4 RCTs (n=2167); standardised mean difference -0.19; 95% CI -0.30 to -0.08; p=0.001; I2=26.5%; moderate certainty evidence) corresponding to a decrease in 12.4 units on a scale of 0 to 100 (95% CI -19.5 to -5.2) and improvement in patient knowledge (2 RCTs (n=1057); risk difference 0.72, 95% CI 0.68, 0.76, p<0.001; I2=0%; low certainty evidence) favouring digital patient decision-support tools compared with usual care. Four of the 11 tools were publicly available and 3 had been implemented in healthcare delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of stroke prevention in AF, digital patient decision-support tools likely reduce decisional conflict and may result in little to no change in patient knowledge, compared with usual care. Future studies should leverage digital capabilities for increased personalisation and interactivity of the tools, with better consideration of health literacy and equity aspects. Additional robust trials and implementation studies are warranted.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020218025.

Health literacy, numeracy, graph literacy, and digital literacy: an overview of definitions, evaluation methods, and best practices

Health literacy is an important skill for people receiving care. Those with limited literacy face disparities in their care and health outcomes when strategies for addressing literacy are not used when delivering health information. In this article, we introduce the importance of considering health literacy, defining it and related concepts including numeracy, graph literacy, and digital literacy, and discuss open questions about measuring health literacy in clinical care. Finally, we present best practices, including assuming 'universal precautions', carefully considering wording, leveraging visualizations, recognizing cultural differences in interpretation, providing guidance on pilot testing, and considering digital literacy when developing electronic materials.

Patient Information Needs and Decision-Making Before a Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device: A Qualitative Study Utilizing Social Media Data

The decision to receive a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) represents a challenging experience for patients. However, the majority of previous research has only considered retrospective accounts of patient experiences. This study aimed to use social media data to characterize the information sought by people anticipating or considering CIED implantation and factors that influence their decision-making experiences. A Python-based script was used to collect posts made to a community intended for discussions concerning CIEDs on the social media platform Reddit. Reflexive content analysis was used to analyze the collected data. From 799 posts collected, 101 made by 86 participants were analyzed. The reported median (range) age of participants was 34 (16-67), and most were anticipating or considering a pacemaker. Three overarching categories classified the data: "Use of social media to meet informational and other needs"; "Factors influencing acceptance of the need for implantation"; and "Specific concerns considered during decision-making." Participants anticipating or considering a CIED predominantly sought experiential information. Among asymptomatic participants, doubts were prevalent, with acceptance being an influential factor in decision-making. Healthcare professionals should recognize the informational and emotional needs of prospective CIED patients and tailor support mechanisms to better facilitate their decision-making.

Patient-reported quality of life and acceptance of the extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: Results from pivotal study

INTRODUCTION

The pivotal study of the extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (EV ICD) recently demonstrated primary efficacy and safety endpoints comparable to previous ICD systems. Patient experience with this novel device has not been reported. The current study examined the standardized patient-reported outcome (PRO) metrics of quality of life (QOL) and patient acceptance of the device.

METHODS

The EV ICD Pivotal Study was a prospective, single-arm, nonrandomized, global, premarket approval trial. Patients completed the 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) QOL surveys at baseline and at 6 months following implant. Additionally, patients completed the Florida Patient Acceptance Survey (FPAS) QOL survey at 6 months.

RESULTS

From baseline to 6 months, patients within the EV ICD Pivotal Study (n = 247) reported statistically significant SF-12 improvements in physical QOL (45.4 ± 9.4 vs. 46.8 ± 9.1 respectively, p = .020) and no changes in mental QOL (49.3 ± 10.4 vs. 50.5 ± 9.7, p = .061). No differences were noted by sex, atrial fibrillation, or the experience of ICD shock. EV ICD patients reported better total FPAS patient acceptance of their ICD than TV-ICD or S-ICD patients using historical norms comparisons (80.4 ± 15.7 vs. 70.2 ± 17.8, p < .0001 for S-ICD and 73.0 ± 17.4, p = .004 for TV-ICD).

CONCLUSION

The initial PROs for EV ICD patients indicated that patients had improvements in physical QOL from baseline to 6-month follow-up and markedly better overall acceptance of their ICD compared to a previous study with S-ICD and TV-ICD data. These initial results suggest that the EV ICD is evaluated positively by patients.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

Characterizing Decision-Making Surrounding Exercise in ARVC: Analysis of Decisional Conflict, Decisional Regret, and Shared Decision-Making

BACKGROUND

Limiting high-intensity exercise is recommended for patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) due to its association with penetrance, arrhythmias, and structural progression. Guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) for exercise level, but there is little evidence regarding its impact. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the extent and implications of SDM for exercise, decisional conflict, and decisional regret in patients with ARVC and at-risk relatives.

METHODS

Adults diagnosed with ARVC or with positive genetic testing enrolled in the Johns Hopkins ARVC Registry were invited to complete a questionnaire that included exercise history and current exercise, SDM (SDM-Q-9), decisional conflict, and decisional regret.

RESULTS

The response rate was 64.8%. Two-thirds of participants (68.0%, n=121) reported clinically significant decisional conflict regarding exercise at diagnosis/genetic testing (DCS [decisional conflict scale]≥25), and half (55.1%, n=98) in the past year. Prevalence of decisional regret was also high with 55.3% (n=99) reporting moderate to severe decisional regret (DRS [decisional regret scale]≥25). The extent of SDM was highly variable ranging from no (0) to perfect (100) SDM (mean, 59.6±25.0). Those diagnosed in adolescence (≤age 21) reported significantly more SDM (P=0.013). Importantly, SDM was associated with less decisional conflict (ß=-0.66, R2=0.567, P<0.01) and decisional regret (ß=-0.37, R2=0.180, P<0.001) and no difference in vigorous intensity aerobic exercise in the 6 months after diagnosis/genetic testing or the past year (P=0.56; P=0.34, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

SDM is associated with lower decisional conflict and decisional regret; and no difference in postdiagnosis exercise. Our data thus support SDM as the preferred model for exercise discussions for ARVC.

Using Patient Decision Aids for Cardiology Care in Diverse Populations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patient decision aids (PDAs) are tools that help guide treatment decisions and support shared decision-making when there is equipoise between treatment options. This review focuses on decision aids that are available to support cardiac treatment options for underrepresented groups.

RECENT FINDINGS

PDAs have been developed to support multiple treatment decisions in cardiology related to coronary artery disease, valvular heart disease, cardiac arrhythmias, heart failure, and cholesterol management. By considering the unique needs and preferences of diverse populations, PDAs can enhance patient engagement and promote equitable healthcare delivery in cardiology. In this review, we examine the benefits, challenges, and current trends in implementing PDAs, with a focus on improving decision-making processes and outcomes for patients from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. In addition, the article highlights key considerations when implementing PDAs and potential future directions in the field.

Shared Decision-Making and Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Shared decision-making is increasingly embraced in health care and recommended in cardiovascular guidelines. Patient involvement in health care decisions, patient-clinician communication, and models of patient-centered care are critical to improve health outcomes and to promote equity, but formal models and evaluation in cardiovascular care are nascent. Shared decision-making promotes equity by involving clinicians and patients, sharing the best available evidence, and recognizing the needs, values, and experiences of individuals and their families when faced with the task of making decisions. Broad endorsement of shared decision-making as a critical component of high-quality, value-based care has raised our awareness, although uptake in clinical practice remains suboptimal for a range of patient, clinician, and system issues. Strategies effective in promoting shared decision-making include educating clinicians on communication techniques, engaging multidisciplinary medical teams, incorporating trained decision coaches, and using tools (ie, patient decision aids) at appropriate literacy and numeracy levels to support patients in their cardiovascular decisions. This scientific statement shines a light on the limited but growing body of evidence of the impact of shared decision-making on cardiovascular outcomes and the potential of shared decision-making as a driver of health equity so that everyone has just opportunities. Multilevel solutions must align to address challenges in policies and reimbursement, system-level leadership and infrastructure, clinician training, access to decision aids, and patient engagement to fully support patients and clinicians to engage in the shared decision-making process and to drive equity and improvement in cardiovascular outcomes.

Shared Decision Making and Cardioneuroablation Allow Discontinuation of Permanent Pacing in Patients with Vagally Mediated Bradycardia

BACKGROUND

Safe discontinuation of pacemaker therapy for vagally mediated bradycardia is a dilemma. The aim of the study was to present the outcomes of a proposed diagnostic and therapeutic process aimed at discontinuing or not restoring pacemaker therapy (PPM) in patients with vagally mediated bradycardia.

METHODS

The study group consisted of two subgroups of patients with suspected vagally mediated bradycardia who were considered to have PPM discontinued or not to restore their PPM if cardioneuroablation (CNA) would successfully treat their bradycardia. A group of 3 patients had just their pacemaker explanted but reimplantation was suggested, and 17 patients had preexisting pacemakers implanted. An invasive electrophysiology study was performed. If EPS was negative, extracardiac vagal nerve stimulation (ECVS) was performed. Then, patients with positive ECVS received CNA. Patients with an implanted pacemaker had it programmed to pace at the lowest possible rate. After the observational period and control EPS including ECVS, redo-CNA was performed if pauses were induced. The decision to explant the pacemaker was obtained based on shared decision making (SDM).

RESULTS

After initial clinical and electrophysiological evaluation, 17 patients were deemed eligible for CNA (which was then performed). During the observational period after the initial CNA, all 17 patients were clinically asymptomatic. The subsequent invasive evaluation with ECVS resulted in pause induction in seven (41%) patients, and these patients underwent redo-CNA. Then, SDM resulted in the discontinuation of pacemaker therapy or a decision to not perform pacemaker reimplantation in all the patients after CAN. The pacemaker was explanted in 12 patients post-CNA, while in 2 patients explantation was postponed. During a median follow-up of 18 (IQR: 8-22) months, recurrent syncope did not occur in the CNA recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Pacemaker therapy in patients with vagally mediated bradycardia could be discontinued safely after CNA.

Patients' Perspectives Regarding Generator Exchanges of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is mandated for patients receiving primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). Less attention has been paid to generator exchange decisions, although at the time of generator exchange, patients' risk of sudden cardiac death, risk of procedural complications, quality of life, or prognosis may have changed. This study was designed to explore how patients make ICD generator exchange decisions.

METHODS

Emory Healthcare patients with primary prevention ICDs implanted from 2013 to 2021 were recruited to complete in-depth interviews exploring perspectives regarding generator exchanges. Interviews were conducted in 2021. Transcribed interviews were qualitatively coded using multilevel template analytic methods. To investigate benefit thresholds for pursuing generator exchanges, patients were presented standard-gamble type hypothetical scenarios where their ICD battery was depleted but their 5-year risk of sudden cardiac death at that time varied (10%, 5%, and 1%).

RESULTS

Fifty patients were interviewed; 18 had a prior generator exchange, 16 had received ICD therapy, and 17 had improved left ventricular ejection fraction. As sudden cardiac death risk decreased from 10% to 5% to 1%, the number of participants willing to undergo a generator exchange decreased from 48 to 42 to 33, respectively. Responses suggest that doctor's recommendations are likely to substantially impact patients' decision-making. Other drivers of decision-making included past experiences with ICD therapy and device implantation, as well as risk aversion. Therapeutic inertia and misconceptions about ICD therapy were common and represent substantive barriers to effective shared decision-making in this context.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong defaults may exist to continue therapy and exchange ICD generators. Updated risk stratification may facilitate shared decision-making and reduce generator exchanges in very low-risk patients, especially if these interventions are directed toward clinicians. Interventions targeting phenomena such as therapeutic inertia may be more impactful and warrant exploration in randomized trials.

Facilitating Shared Decision Making Among Black Patients at Risk for Sudden Cardiac Arrest : A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation are multifactorial and are partly explained by higher refusal rates.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of a video decision support tool for Black patients eligible for an ICD.

DESIGN

Multicenter, randomized clinical trial conducted between September 2016 and April 2020. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02819973).

SETTING

Fourteen academic and community-based electrophysiology clinics in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Black adults with heart failure who were eligible for a primary prevention ICD.

INTERVENTION

An encounter-based video decision support tool or usual care.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the decision regarding ICD implantation. Additional outcomes included patient knowledge, decisional conflict, ICD implantation within 90 days, the effect of racial concordance on outcomes, and the time patients spent with clinicians.

RESULTS

Of the 330 randomly assigned patients, 311 contributed data for the primary outcome. Among those randomly assigned to the video group, assent to ICD implantation was 58.6% compared with 59.4% in the usual care group (difference, -0.8 percentage point [95% CI, -13.2 to 11.1 percentage points]). Compared with usual care, participants in the video group had a higher mean knowledge score (difference, 0.7 [CI, 0.2 to 1.1]) and a similar decisional conflict score (difference, -2.6 [CI, -5.7 to 0.4]). The ICD implantation rate within 90 days was 65.7%, with no differences by intervention. Participants randomly assigned to the video group spent less time with their clinician than those in the usual care group (mean, 22.1 vs. 27.0 minutes; difference, -4.9 minutes [CI, -9.4 to -0.3 minutes]). Racial concordance between video and study participants did not affect study outcomes.

LIMITATION

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implemented a requirement for shared decision making for ICD implantation during the study.

CONCLUSION

A video-based decision support tool increased patient knowledge but did not increase assent to ICD implantation.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate an Atrial Fibrillation Stroke Prevention Shared Decision-Making Pathway

Background Oral anticoagulation reduces stroke and disability in atrial fibrillation (AF) but is underused. We evaluated the effects of a novel patient-clinician shared decision-making (SDM) tool in reducing oral anticoagulation patient's decisional conflict as compared with usual care. Methods and Results We designed and evaluated a new digital decision aid in a multicenter, randomized, comparative effectiveness trial, ENHANCE-AF (Engaging Patients to Help Achieve Increased Patient Choice and Engagement for AF Stroke Prevention). The digital AF shared decision-making toolkit was developed using patient-centered design with clear health communication principles (eg, meaningful images, limited text). Available in English and Spanish, the toolkit included the following: (1) a brief animated video; (2) interactive questions with answers; (3) a quiz to check on understanding; (4) a worksheet to be used by the patient during the encounter; and (5) an online guide for clinicians. The study population included English or Spanish speakers with nonvalvular AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc stroke score ≥1 for men or ≥2 for women. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either usual care or the shared decision-making toolkit. The primary end point was the validated 16-item Decision Conflict Scale at 1 month. Secondary outcomes included Decision Conflict Scale at 6 months and the 10-item Decision Regret Scale at 1 and 6 months as well as a weighted average of Mann-Whitney U-statistics for both the Decision Conflict Scale and the Decision Regret Scale. A total of 1001 participants were enrolled and followed at 5 different sites in the United States between December 18, 2019, and August 17, 2022. The mean patient age was 69±10 years (40% women, 16.9% Black, 4.5% Hispanic, 3.6% Asian), and 50% of participants had CHA2DS2-VASc scores ≥3 (men) or ≥4 (women). The primary end point at 1 month showed a clinically meaningful reduction in decisional conflict: a 7-point difference in median scores between the 2 arms (16.4 versus 9.4; Mann-Whitney U-statistics=0.550; P=0.007). For the secondary end point of 1-month Decision Regret Scale, the difference in median scores between arms was 5 points in the direction of less decisional regret (P=0.078). The treatment effects lessened over time: at 6 months the difference in medians was 4.7 points for Decision Conflict Scale (P=0.060) and 0 points for Decision Regret Scale (P=0.35). Conclusions Implementation of a novel shared decision-making toolkit (afibguide.com; afibguide.com/clinician) achieved significantly lower decisional conflict compared with usual care in patients with AF. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04096781.

Transforming Atrial Fibrillation Research to Integrate Social Determinants of Health: A National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop Report

Importance

Only modest attention has been paid to the contributions of social determinants of health to atrial fibrillation (AF) risk factors, diagnosis, symptoms, management, and outcomes. The diagnosis of AF provides unique challenges exacerbated by the arrhythmia's often paroxysmal nature and individuals' disparate access to health care and technologies that facilitate detection. Social determinants of health affect access to care and management decisions for AF, increasing the likelihood of adverse outcomes among individuals who experience systemic disadvantages. Developing effective approaches to address modifiable social determinants of health requires research to eliminate the substantive inequities in health care delivery and outcomes in AF.

Observations

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened an expert panel to identify major knowledge gaps and research opportunities in the field of social determinants of AF. The workshop addressed the following social determinants: (1) socioeconomic status and access to care; (2) health literacy; (3) race, ethnicity, and racism; (4) sex and gender; (5) shared decision-making in systemically disadvantaged populations; and (6) place, including rurality, neighborhood, and community. Many individuals with AF have multiple adverse social determinants, which may cluster in the individual and in systemically disadvantaged places (eg, rural locations, urban neighborhoods). Cumulative disadvantages may accumulate over the life course and contribute to inequities in the diagnosis, management, and outcomes in AF.

Conclusions and Relevance

Workshop participants identified multiple critical research questions and approaches to catalyze social determinants of health research that address the distinctive aspects of AF. The long-term aspiration of this work is to eradicate the substantive inequities in AF diagnosis, management, and outcomes across populations.

Association of Race and Ethnicity With Oral Anticoagulation and Associated Outcomes in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Findings From the Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation Registry

Importance

Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is underprescribed in underrepresented racial and ethnic group individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF). Little is known of how differential OAC prescribing relates to inequities in AF outcomes.

Objective

To compare OAC use at discharge and AF-related outcomes by race and ethnicity in the Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation (GWTG-AFIB) registry.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort analysis used data from the GWTG-AFIB registry, a national quality improvement initiative for hospitalized patients with AF. All registry patients hospitalized with AF from 2014 to 2020 were included in the study. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to July 2022.

Exposures

Self-reported race and ethnicity assessed in GWTG-AFIB registry.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was prescription of direct-acting OAC (DOAC) or warfarin at discharge. Secondary outcomes included cumulative 1-year incidence of ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and mortality postdischarge. Outcomes adjusted for patient demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic characteristics as well as hospital factors.

Results

Among 69 553 patients hospitalized with AF from 159 sites between 2014 and 2020, 863 (1.2%) were Asian, 5062 (7.3%) were Black, 4058 (5.8%) were Hispanic, and 59 570 (85.6%) were White. Overall, 34 113 (49.1%) were women; the median (IQR) age was 72 (63-80) years, and the median (IQR) CHA2DS2-VASc score (calculated as congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 years and older, diabetes, stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, and sex category) was 4 (2-5). At discharge, 56 385 patients (81.1%) were prescribed OAC therapy, including 41 760 (74.1%) receiving DOAC. OAC prescription at discharge was lowest in Hispanic patients (3010 [74.2%]), followed by Black patients (3935 [77.7%]) Asian patients (691 [80.1%]), and White patients (48 749 [81.8%]). Black patients were less likely than White patients to be discharged while taking any anticoagulant (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84) and DOACs (adjusted odds ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.65-0.82). In 16 307 individuals with 1-year follow up data, bleeding risks (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.08; 95% CI, 1.53-2.83), stroke risks (aHR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.34-3.20), and mortality risks (aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.02-1.47) were higher in Black patients than White patients. Hispanic patients had higher stroke risk (aHR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.38-2.95) than White patients.

Conclusions and Relevance

In a national registry of hospitalized patients with AF, compared with White patients, Black patients were less likely to be discharged while taking anticoagulant therapy and DOACs in particular. Black and Hispanic patients had higher risk of stroke compared with White patients; Black patients had a higher risk of bleeding and mortality. There is an urgent need for interventions to achieve pharmacoequity in guideline-directed AF management to improve overall outcomes.

Amateur Athlete with Sinus Arrest and Severe Bradycardia Diagnosed through a Heart Rate Monitor: A Six-Year Observation-The Necessity of Shared Decision-Making in Heart Rhythm Therapy Management

Heart rate monitors (HRMs) are used by millions of athletes worldwide to monitor exercise intensity and heart rate (HR) during training. This case report presents a 34-year-old male amateur soccer player with severe bradycardia who accidentally identified numerous pauses of over 4 s (maximum length: 7.3 s) during sleep on his own HRM with a heart rate variability (HRV) function. Simultaneous HRM and Holter ECG recordings were performed in an outpatient clinic, finding consistent 6.3 s sinus arrests (SA) with bradycardia of 33 beats/min. During the patient's hospitalization for a transient ischemic attack, the longest pauses on the Holter ECG were recorded, and he was suggested to undergo pacemaker implantation. He then reduced the volume/intensity of exercise for 4 years. Afterward, he spent 2 years without any regular training due to depression. After these 6 years, another Holter ECG test was performed in our center, not confirming the aforementioned disturbances and showing a tendency to tachycardia. The significant SA was resolved after a period of detraining. The case indicates that considering invasive therapy was unreasonable, and patient-centered care and shared decision-making play a key role in cardiac pacing therapy. In addition, some sports HRM with an HRV function can help diagnose bradyarrhythmia, both in professional and amateur athletes.

Assessment of freely available online videos of cardiac electrophysiological procedures from a shared decision-making perspective

Background

Physicians recommend electrophysiological (EP) procedures to patients with arrhythmic risk. This involves shared decision-making (SDM). Patients increasingly search for additional information online. Freely available online videos are an attractive source.

Objective

We assessed freely available online videos for EP procedures from the perspective of SDM to determine if such videos can be shared with patients for SDM.

Methods

We searched for freely available online videos related to 6 common EP procedures limited to English language and duration between 1 and 10 minutes using Google and Bing. Data collected included date and source of upload, number of hits, and duration. Videos were assessed systematically for understandability, actionability (PEMAT tool), relatability, teamwork, and mention of risk.

Results

A total of 78 videos met our inclusion criteria, out of 960 video links. Overall inter-rater agreement was moderate to good. Video upload dates spanned 12 years and number of hits ranged from 87 to 594,000. The majority of videos (63%) were produced by health care systems or academic institutions. For all 78 videos the mean total PEMAT tool score was 48.6%. Thirty-five percent of videos showed a patient engaged in a conversation with the physician or a team member; 41% of videos showed other team members. The potential for complications was mentioned in 10%.

Conclusion

The majority of online, freely available videos for common EP procedures lack features useful for SDM and may not be helpful for sharing with patients from that perspective. It is possible to create high-quality videos that can facilitate SDM.

Randomized evaluation of decision support interventions for atrial fibrillation: Rationale and design of the RED-AF study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) improves the likelihood that patients will receive care in a manner consistent with their priorities. To facilitate SDM, decision aids (DA) are commonly used, both to prepare a patient before their clinician visit, as well as to facilitate discussion during the visit. However, the relative efficacy of patient-focused or encounter-based DAs on SDM and patient outcomes remains largely unknown. We aim to directly estimate the comparative effectiveness of two DA's on SDM observed in encounters to discuss stroke prevention strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

The study aims to recruit 1200 adult patients with non-valvular AF who qualify for anticoagulation therapy, and their clinicians who manage stroke prevention strategies, in a 2x2 cluster randomized multi-center trial at six sites. Two DA's were developed as interactive, online, non-linear tools: a patient decision aid (PDA) to be used by patients before the encounter, and an encounter decision aid (EDA) to be used by clinicians with their patients during the encounter. Patients will be randomized to PDA or usual care; clinicians will be randomized to EDA or usual care.

RESULTS

Primary outcomes are quality of SDM, patient decision making, and patient knowledge. Secondary outcomes include anticoagulation choice, adherence, and clinical events.

CONCLUSION

This trial is the first randomized, head-to-head comparison of the effects of an EDA versus a PDA on SDM. Our results will help to inform future SDM interventions to improve patients' AF outcomes and experiences with stroke prevention strategies.