Integrating Real-Time Clinical Information to Provide Estimates of Net Clinical Benefit of Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Can a best practice advisory improve anticoagulation prescribing to reduce stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation?

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac rhythm disorder and a risk factor for stroke. Randomized trials have demonstrated that anticoagulation can reduce strokes in AF patients. Yet, widespread underutilization of this therapy continues. To address this practice gap, we designed a study to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of a best practice advisory (BPA) for an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool (AFDST) embedded within our electronic health record.

METHODS

Our intervention is provider-facing, focused on decision support. Clinical setting is ambulatory patients being seen by primary care physicians. We prospectively enrolled 608 patients in our health system who are currently receiving less than optimal anticoagulation therapy as determined by the AFDST and randomized them to one of two arms - 1) usual care, in which the AFDST is available for use; or 2) addition of a BPA to the AFDST notifying clinicians that their patient stands to gain significant benefit from a change in current therapy. Primary outcome was effectiveness of the BPA measured by change to "appropriate thromboprophylaxis" based on the AFDST recommendation at 3 months post-enrollment. Secondary endpoints included Reach and Adoption from the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, & Maintenance) framework for implementation studies.

RESULTS

Among 562 patients with a minimum follow-up of 3 months, addition of a BPA to the AFDST resulted in significant improvement in anticoagulation therapy, 5 % (12/248) versus 11 % (33/314) p = 0.02, odds ratio 2.31 (95 % CI, 1.17-4.87).

CONCLUSIONS

A BPA added to an AF decision support tool improved anticoagulation therapy among AF patients in a primary care academic health system setting.

Racial and sex differences in optimizing anticoagulation therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation

Study objective

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac rhythm disorder, responsible for 15 % of strokes in the United States. Studies continue to document underuse of anticoagulation therapy in minority populations and women. Our objective was to compare the proportion of AF patients by race and sex who were receiving non-optimal anticoagulation as determined by an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool (AFDST).

Design setting and participants

Retrospective cohort study including 14,942 patients within University of Cincinnati Health Care system. Data were analyzed between November 18, 2020, and November 20, 2021.

Main outcomes and measures

Discordance between current therapy and that recommended by the AFDST.

Results

In our two-category analysis 6107 (41 %) received non-optimal anticoagulation therapy, defined as current treatment category ≠ AFDST-recommended treatment category. Non-optimal therapy was highest in Black (42 % [n = 712]) and women (42 % [n = 2668]) and lower in White (39 % [n = 4748]) and male (40 % [n = 3439]) patients. Compared with White patients, unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios of receiving non-optimal anticoagulant therapy for Black patients were 1.13; 95 % CI, 1.02-1.30, p = 0.02; and 1.17; 95%CI, 1.04-1.31, p = 0.01; respectively, and 1.10; 95 % CI 1.03-1.18, p = 0.005; and 1.36; 95 % CI, 1.25-1.47, p < 0.001; for females compared with males.

Conclusions and relevance

In patients with atrial fibrillation in the University of Cincinnati Health system, Black race and female sex were independently associated with an increased odds of receiving non-optimal anticoagulant therapy.

Electronic health record-embedded decision support to reduce stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation - Study protocol

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common significant cardiac rhythm disorder and is a powerful common risk factor for stroke. Randomized trials have demonstrated that anticoagulation can reduce the risk of stroke in patients with AF. Yet, there continues to be widespread underutilization of this therapy. To address this practice gap locally and improve efforts to reduce the risk of stroke for patients with AF in our health system, we have designed a study to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool (AFDST) embedded within our electronic health record.

METHODS

Our intervention is provider-facing and focused on decision support. The clinical setting is ambulatory patients being seen by primary care physicians. Patients include those with both incident and prevalent AF. This randomized, prospective trial will enroll 800 patients in our University of Cincinnati Health System who are currently receiving less than optimal anticoagulation therapy as determined by the AFDST. Patients will be randomized to one of two arms - 1) usual care, in which the AFDST is available for use; 2) addition of a best practice advisory (BPA) to the AFDST notifying the clinician that their patient stands to gain a significant benefit from a change in their current thromboprophylactic therapy.

RESULTS

The primary outcome is effectiveness of the BPA measured by change to "appropriate thromboprophylaxis" based on the AFDST recommendation at 3 months post randomization. Secondary endpoints include Reach and Adoption, from the RE-AIM framework for implementation studies. Sample size is based upon an improvement from inappropriate to appropriate anticoagulation therapy estimated at 4% in the usual care arm and ≥10% in the experimental arm.

CONCLUSION

Our goal is to examine whether addition of a BPA to an AFDST focused on primary care physicians in an ambulatory care setting will improve "appropriate thromboprophylaxis" compared with usual care. Results will be examined at 3 months post randomization and at the end of the study to evaluate durability of changes. We expect to complete patient enrollment by the end of June 2022.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04099485.

Effects of Computerized Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes: Systematic Review

Background

Computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) are software programs that support the decision making of practitioners and other staff. Other reviews have analyzed the relationship between CDSSs, practitioner performance, and patient outcomes. These reviews reported positive practitioner performance in over half the articles analyzed, but very little information was found for patient outcomes.

Objective

The purpose of this review was to analyze the relationship between CDSSs, practitioner performance, and patient medical outcomes. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were queried.

Methods

Articles were chosen based on year published (last 10 years), high quality, peer-reviewed sources, and discussion of the relationship between the use of CDSS as an intervention and links to practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers used an Excel spreadsheet (Microsoft Corporation) to collect information on the relationship between CDSSs and practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers also collected observations of participants, intervention, comparison with control group, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) along with those showing implicit bias. Articles were analyzed by multiple reviewers following the Kruse protocol for systematic reviews. Data were organized into multiple tables for analysis and reporting.

Results

Themes were identified for both practitioner performance (n=38) and medical outcomes (n=36). A total of 66% (25/38) of articles had occurrences of positive practitioner performance, 13% (5/38) found no difference in practitioner performance, and 21% (8/38) did not report or discuss practitioner performance. Zero articles reported negative practitioner performance. A total of 61% (22/36) of articles had occurrences of positive patient medical outcomes, 8% (3/36) found no statistically significant difference in medical outcomes between intervention and control groups, and 31% (11/36) did not report or discuss medical outcomes. Zero articles found negative patient medical outcomes attributed to using CDSSs.

Conclusions

Results of this review are commensurate with previous reviews with similar objectives, but unlike these reviews we found a high level of reporting of positive effects on patient medical outcomes.

Ischemic Stroke and Bleeding: Clinical Benefit of Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation After Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Background and Purpose- Patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are at risk for ischemic events. While risk calculators (CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED) have been validated to assess risk for ischemic stroke and major bleeding in AF patients, decisions about anticoagulation must consider the net clinical benefit of anticoagulation. Furthermore, stroke and bleeding risk are highly correlated, making decisions more difficult. Methods- We examined patients in the GERFHS III study (Genetic and Environmental Risk Factors for Hemorrhagic Stroke)-a population-based retrospective study of spontaneous ICH patients without a structural or traumatic cause in the Greater Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky region between July 2008 and December 2012. CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-B(L)ED (minus L because labile international normalized ratio was unavailable) scores were calculated for ICH patients with AF. Using a Markov state transition model, we estimated net clinical benefit of anticoagulation relative to no treatment in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). We defined minimal clinically relevant benefit as 0.1 QALYs. Results- Among 1186 cases of spontaneous ICH, 95 cases had AF and met our survival criteria. Within 1 year, 8 of 95 (8%) would be expected to have a major bleeding event on anticoagulation, and 5 of 95 (5%) of patients would be expected to have an ischemic stroke off anticoagulation. Sixty-eight of 95 (71%) patients would have higher risk for major bleeding than for ischemic stroke. Anticoagulation with directly acting anticoagulants would result in no clinically significant gain or loss in 73%. Roughly 12% would gain >0.1 QALYs, and 15% would lose >0.1 QALYs. Among patients receiving aspirin, most have no significant net clinical benefit or loss. Overall, anticoagulation of the entire cohort would result in an aggregate loss of 0.92 QALYs. Conclusions- Our analysis suggests that universal anticoagulation after ICH would be associated with a net loss of QALY. Additional factors should be considered before anticoagulating patients with AF after ICH. Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00930280.

Net Clinical Benefit of Oral Anticoagulation Among Older Adults With Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

While guidelines recommend anticoagulation for all atrial fibrillation (AF) patients ≥75 years, evidence for the net clinical benefit (NCB) of anticoagulant in older adults is sparse. We sought to determine the association between age and NCB of anticoagulation in older adults with AF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined adults ≥75 years with incident AF in the Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation-Cardiovascular Research Network cohort. Using a Markov state transition model, we estimated the lifetime NCB of warfarin and apixaban relative to no treatment in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). In the decision model, each month patients face a chance of stroke, hemorrhage, or death from a competing cause; the likelihood of each is a function of individual patients' stroke risk, hemorrhage risk, and life expectancy. We defined minimal clinically relevant lifetime benefit as 0.10 QALYs. In a sensitivity analysis, we examined the effect of competing risks of death on NCB using 2 models, one including competing risks and the second without competing risks. We included 14 946 patients, with a median age of 81 years and median CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4. In the main analysis, after age 87, NCB associated with warfarin decreased below 0.10 lifetime QALYs while NCB associated with apixaban did not decrease below 0.10 lifetime QALYs until after age 92. In sensitivity analyses, over a 3-year horizon, removing competing risks of death resulted in higher NCB (at 90 years, median difference using warfarin 0.010 QALYs [95% CI, 0.009-0.013], median difference using apixaban 0.025 QALYs [95% CI, 0.024-0.026]).

CONCLUSIONS

The NCB of anticoagulation decreases with advancing age. The competing risk of death diminishes the NCB of anticoagulation for older patients with AF. Physicians should consider competing mortality risks when recommending anticoagulants to older adults with AF.

Developing a Conversation Aid to Support Shared Decision Making: Reflections on Designing Anticoagulation Choice

Patient-centered care requires that treatments respond to the problematic situation of each patient in a manner that makes intellectual, emotional, and practical sense, an achievement that requires shared decision making (SDM). To implement SDM in practice, tools-sometimes called conversation aids or decision aids-are prepared by collating, curating, and presenting high-quality, comprehensive, and up-to-date evidence. Yet, the literature offers limited guidance for how to make evidence support SDM. Herein, we describe our approach and the challenges encountered during the development of Anticoagulation Choice, a conversation aid to help patients with atrial fibrillation and their clinicians jointly consider the risk of thromboembolic stroke and decide whether and how to respond to this risk with anticoagulation.

Effect of Variation in Published Stroke Rates on the Net Clinical Benefit of Anticoagulation for Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Stroke rates in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who are not receiving anticoagulant therapy vary widely across published studies; the resulting effect on the net clinical benefit of anticoagulation in AF is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of variation in published AF stroke rates on the net clinical benefit of anticoagulation.

DESIGN

Markov model decision analysis. Warfarin was the base case, and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were modeled in a secondary analysis.

SETTING

Community-dwelling adults.

PATIENTS

33 434 adults with incident AF.

MEASUREMENTS

Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

Of the 33 434 patients, 27 179 had a CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age, diabetes, stroke, and vascular disease) score of 2 or more. The population benefit of warfarin anticoagulation for these patients was least using stroke rates from the ATRIA (AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors In Atrial Fibrillation) study and greatest using those from the Danish National Patient Registry (6290 QALYs [95% CI, ±2.3%] vs. 24 110 QALYs [CI, ±1.9%]; P < 0.001). The optimal CHA2DS2-VASc score threshold for anticoagulation was 3 or more using stroke rates from ATRIA, 2 or more using those from the Swedish AF cohort study, 1 or more using those from the SPORTIF (Stroke Prevention using ORal Thrombin Inhibitor in atrial Fibrillation) study, and 0 or more using those from the Danish National Patient Registry. Accounting for lower rates of NOAC-associated intracranial hemorrhage decreased optimal CHA2DS2-VASc score thresholds, but these thresholds still varied widely.

LIMITATION

Measured benefit may not generalize to other populations.

CONCLUSION

Variation in published AF stroke rates for patients not receiving anticoagulant therapy results in multifold variation in the net clinical benefit of anticoagulation. Guidelines should better reflect the uncertainty in current thresholds of stroke risk score for recommending anticoagulation.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None.

Shared decision-making tool for thromboprophylaxis in atrial fibrillation - A feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Appropriate thromboprophylaxis for patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF) remains a national challenge.

METHODS

We hypothesized that a shared decision-making interaction facilitated by an Atrial Fibrillation Shared Decision Making Tool (AFSDM) would improve patient knowledge about atrial fibrillation, and the risks and benefits of various treatment options for stroke prevention; increase satisfaction with the decision-making process; improve the therapeutic alliance between patient and the clinical care team; and increase medication adherence. Using a pre- and post-visit study design, we enrolled 76 patients and completed 2 office visits and 1-month telephone follow-up for 65 patients being seen in our Arrhythmia Clinic over the 1-year period (July 2016 through June 2017). Our primary outcome measure was change in decisional conflict between the first and second clinical visit.

RESULTS

Decisional conflict decreased from an average of 31 to 9. Mean change was 22.3 (95% CI, 25.7 - 37.1), corresponding to an effect size of 0.94 standard deviations. Satisfaction with decision increased from 4.0 to 4.5, measures of therapeutic alliance with the care team (Kim Alliance scale) increased from 100.1 to 103.1, and satisfaction with provider increased from 4.2 to 4.5 (P < .0001 for all measures). AF knowledge assessment scores increased from 8.4 to 9.1, and knowledge about personal stroke and bleeding risk increased from 1 to 1.5 (P < .0001). Finally, medication adherence improved as reflected by an increase in the Morisky Medication Adherence scale from 5.9 to 6.4 (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

A shared decision-making interaction, facilitated by an AFSDM can significantly improve multiple measures of decision-making quality, leading to improved medication adherence and patient satisfaction.

Health Information Technology Continues to Show Positive Effect on Medical Outcomes: Systematic Review

Background

Health information technology (HIT) has been introduced into the health care industry since the 1960s when mainframes assisted with financial transactions, but questions remained about HIT’s contribution to medical outcomes. Several systematic reviews since the 1990s have focused on this relationship. This review updates the literature.

Objective

The purpose of this review was to analyze the current literature for the impact of HIT on medical outcomes. We hypothesized that there is a positive association between the adoption of HIT and medical outcomes.

Methods

We queried the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) by PubMed databases for peer-reviewed publications in the last 5 years that defined an HIT intervention and an effect on medical outcomes in terms of efficiency or effectiveness. We structured the review from the Primary Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), and we conducted the review in accordance with the Assessment for Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR).

Results

We narrowed our search from 3636 papers to 37 for final analysis. At least one improved medical outcome as a result of HIT adoption was identified in 81% (25/37) of research studies that met inclusion criteria, thus strongly supporting our hypothesis. No statistical difference in outcomes was identified as a result of HIT in 19% of included studies. Twelve categories of HIT and three categories of outcomes occurred 38 and 65 times, respectively.

Conclusions

A strong majority of the literature shows positive effects of HIT on the effectiveness of medical outcomes, which positively supports efforts that prepare for stage 3 of meaningful use. This aligns with previous reviews in other time frames.

Atrial fibrillation decision support tool: Population perspective

BACKGROUND

Appropriate thromboprophylaxis for patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF) remains a national challenge. The recent availability of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with comparable efficacy and improved safety compared with warfarin alters the balance between risk factors for stroke and benefit of anticoagulation. Our objective was to examine the impact of DOACs as an alternative to warfarin on the net benefit of oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) in a real-world population of AF patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with paroxysmal or persistent nonvalvular AF. We updated an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool (AFDST) to include DOACs as treatment options. The tool generates patient-specific recommendations based upon individual patient risk factor profiles for stroke and major bleeding using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) calculated for each treatment strategy by a decision analytic model. The setting included inpatient and ambulatory sites in an academic health center in the midwestern United States. The study involved 5,121 adults with nonvalvular AF seen for any ambulatory visit or inpatient hospitalization over the 1-year period (January through December 2016). Outcome measure was net clinical benefit in QALYs.

RESULTS

When DOACs are a therapeutic option, the AFDST recommends OAT for 4,134 (81%) patients and no antithrombotic therapy or aspirin for 489 (9%). A strong recommendation for OAT could not be made in 498 (10%) patients. When warfarin is the only option, OAT is recommended for 3,228 (63%) patients and no antithrombotic therapy or aspirin for 973 (19%). A strong recommendation for OAT could not be made in 920 (18%) patients. In total, 1,508 QALYs could be gained if treatment were changed to that recommended by the AFDST.

CONCLUSIONS

Availability of DOACs increases the proportion of patients for whom oral anticoagulation therapy is recommended in a real-world cohort of AF patients and increased projected QALYs by more than 1,500 when all patients are receiving thromboprophylaxis as recommended by the AFDST compared with current treatment.

Using an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool for Thromboprophylaxis in Atrial Fibrillation: Effect of Sex and Age

OBJECTIVES

To assess the appropriateness of oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) in women and elderly adults, looking for patterns of undertreatment or unnecessary treatment.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Primary care practices of an academic healthcare system.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults (aged 28-93) with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) seen between March 2013 and February 2014 (N = 1,585).

MEASUREMENTS

Treatment recommendations were made using an AF decision support tool (AFDST) based on projections of quality-adjusted life expectancy calculated using a decision analytical model that integrates individual-specific risk factors for stroke and hemorrhage.

RESULTS

Treatment was discordant from AFDST-recommended treatment in 45% (326/725) of women and 39% (338/860) of men (P = .02). Although current treatment was discordant from recommended in 35% (89/258) of participants aged 85 and older and in 43% (575/1,328) of those younger than 85 (P = .01), many undertreated elderly adults were receiving aspirin as the sole antithrombotic agent.

CONCLUSION

Physicians should understand that female sex is a significant risk factor for AF-related stroke and incorporate this into decision-making about thromboprophylaxis. Treating older adults with aspirin instead of OAT exposes them to significant risk of bleeding with little to no reduction in AF-related stroke risk.

Effectiveness and usage of a decision support system to improve stroke prevention in general practice: A cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adherence to guidelines pertaining to stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation is poor. Decision support systems have shown promise in increasing guideline adherence.

AIMS

To improve guideline adherence with a non-obtrusive clinical decision support system integrated in the workflow. Secondly, we seek to capture reasons for guideline non-adherence.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A cluster randomized controlled trial in Dutch general practices.

METHOD

A decision support system was developed that implemented properties positively associated with effectiveness: real-time, non-interruptive and based on data from electronic health records. Recommendations were based on the Dutch general practitioners guideline for atrial fibrillation that uses the CHA2DS2-VAsc for stroke risk stratification. Usage data and responses to the recommendations were logged. Effectiveness was measured as adherence to the guideline. We used a chi square to test for group differences and a mixed effects model to correct for clustering and baseline adherence.

RESULTS

Our analyses included 781 patients. Usage of the system was low (5%) and declined over time. In total, 76 notifications received a response: 58% dismissal and 42% acceptance. At the end of the study, both groups had improved, by 8% and 5% respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between groups (Control: 50%, Intervention: 55% P = 0.23). Clustered analysis revealed similar results. Only one usable reasons for non-adherence was captured.

CONCLUSION

Our study could not demonstrate the effectiveness of a decision support system in general practice, which was likely due to lack of use. Our findings should be used to develop next generation decision support systems that are effective in the challenging setting of general practice.

Wide Variation in Reported Rates of Stroke Across Cohorts of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Background:

Oral anticoagulants decrease ischemic stroke rates in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) but increase the risk of bleeding. For the average patient with AF, the threshold of annual ischemic stroke rate where the benefit of anticoagulation outweighs the bleeding risk (net clinical benefit) has been shown to be ≈1% to 2%. Guideline recommendations for oral anticoagulants in AF are based on the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc stroke risk point scores, assuming that those scores translate to fixed stroke rates. However, the relationship between stroke point scores and annual stroke rates may vary substantially across populations. We sought to comprehensively assess the reported rates of stroke in patients with AF and the relationship of stroke rates to stroke risk point scores.

Methods:

A systematic review of cohort studies and randomized controlled trials enrolled patients with nonvalvular AF not treated with oral anticoagulants.

Results:

Of the 3552 studies screened, we identified 34 studies eligible for analysis. Overall stroke rates in cohort studies were highly heterogeneous (Q=5706.54, P <0.001; I 2 = 99.6%) and ranged from 0.45% to 9.28% per year, despite being of similar objective study quality. The mean North American stroke rate was less than one-third that of the mean European stroke rate ( P <0.0001). However, a random effects regression indicated that between-study variability was not significantly accounted for by cohort region, prospective versus retrospective design, calendar year of study, or outcome event cluster. At a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score of 1, 76% of cohorts reported ischemic stroke rates <1% per year and only 18% of cohorts reported a stroke rate >2% per year. At a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score of 2, 27% of cohorts reported stroke rates below 1% per year, 40% reported stroke rates between 1 and 2% per year, and 33% reported stroke rates >2% per year.

Conclusions:

Substantial variation exists across cohorts in overall stroke rates and rates corresponding to CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc point scores. These variations can affect the point score threshold for recommending oral anticoagulants in AF. The majority of cohorts did not observe stroke rates that would indicate a clear expected net clinical benefit for anticoagulating AF patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores of 1 or 2.

Decision-making about the use of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant therapies for patients with atrial fibrillation

Until recently, vitamin K antagonists, warfarin being the most commonly used agent in the United States, have been the only oral anticoagulant therapies available to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In the last 5 years four new, non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants, the so-called NOACs or novel oral anticoagulants, have come to market and been approved by the Federal Drug Administration. Despite comparable if not superior efficacy in preventing AF-related stroke, and generally lower risks of major hemorrhage, particularly intracranial bleeding, the uptake of these agents has been slow. A number of barriers stand in the way of the more widespread use of these novel agents. Chief among them is concern about the lack of antidotes or reversal agents. Other concerns include the need for strict medication adherence, since missing even a single dose can lead to a non-anticoagulated state; out-of-pocket costs for patients; the lack of easily available laboratory tests to quantitatively assess the level of anticoagulant activity when these agents are being used; contraindications to use in patients with severe chronic kidney disease; and black-box warnings about the increased risk of thromboembolic events if these agents are discontinued prematurely. Fortunately, a number of reversal agents are in the pipeline. Three reversal agents, idarucizumab, andexanet alfa, and aripazine, have already progressed to human studies and show great promise as either antidotes for specific drugs or as universal reversal agents. The availability of these reversal agents will likely increase the clinical use of the non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants. In light of the many complex and nuanced issues surrounding the choice of an optimal anticoagulant for any AF patient, a patient-centered/shared decision-making approach will be useful.

Impact of an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool on thromboprophylaxis for atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Appropriate thromboprophylaxis for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a national challenge.

METHODS

We hypothesized that provision of decision support in the form of an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool (AFDST) would improve thromboprophylaxis for AF patients. We conducted a cluster randomized trial involving 15 primary care practices and 1,493 adults with nonvalvular AF in an integrated health care system between April 2014 and February 2015. Physicians in the intervention group received patient-level treatment recommendations made by the AFDST. Our primary outcome was the proportion of patients with antithrombotic therapy that was discordant from AFDST recommendation.

RESULTS

Treatment was discordant in 42% of 801 patients in the intervention group. Physicians reviewed reports for 240 patients. Among these patients, thromboprophylaxis was discordant in 63%, decreasing to 59% 1 year later (P = .02). In nonstratified analyses, changes in discordant care were not significantly different between the intervention group and control groups. In multivariate regression models, assignment to the intervention group resulted in a nonsignificant trend toward decreased discordance (P = .29), and being a patient of a resident physician (P = .02) and a higher HAS-BLED score predicted decreased discordance (P = .03), whereas female gender (P = .01) and a higher CHADSVASc score (P = .10) predicted increased discordance.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients whose physicians reviewed recommendations of the decision support tool discordant therapy decreased significantly over 1 year. However, in nonstratified analyses, the intervention did not result in significant improvements in discordant antithrombotic therapy.