Preference-Based Antithrombotic Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: Implications for Clinical Decision Making

Characterizing atrial fibrillation symptom improvement following de novo catheter ablation

AIMS

Atrial fibrillation (AF) symptom relief is a primary indication for catheter ablation, but AF symptom resolution is not well characterized. The study objective was to describe AF symptom documentation in electronic health records (EHRs) pre- and post-ablation and identify correlates of post-ablation symptoms.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using EHRs of patients with AF (n = 1293), undergoing ablation in a large, urban health system from 2010 to 2020. We extracted symptom data from clinical notes using a natural language processing algorithm (F score: 0.81). We used Cochran's Q tests with post-hoc McNemar's tests to determine differences in symptom prevalence pre- and post-ablation. We used logistic regression models to estimate the adjusted odds of symptom resolution by personal or clinical characteristics at 6 and 12 months post-ablation. In fully adjusted models, at 12 months post-ablation patients, patients with heart failure had significantly lower odds of dyspnoea resolution [odds ratio (OR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-0.57], oedema resolution (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.25-0.56), and fatigue resolution (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34-0.85), but higher odds of palpitations resolution (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.25-2.89) compared with those without heart failure. Age 65 and older, female sex, Black or African American race, smoking history, and antiarrhythmic use were also associated with lower odds of resolution of specific symptoms at 6 and 12 months.

CONCLUSION

The post-ablation symptom patterns are heterogeneous. Findings warrant confirmation with larger, more representative data sets, which may be informative for patients whose primary goal for undergoing an ablation is symptom relief.

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.

"Replace uncertainty with information": Shared decision-making and decision quality surrounding catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

AIMS

As a first step in developing a decision aid to support shared decision-making (SDM) for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) to evaluate treatment options for rhythm and symptom control, we aimed to measure decision quality and describe decision-making processes among patients and clinicians involved in decision-making around catheter ablation for AF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a cross-sectional, mixed-methods study guided by a SDM model outlining decision antecedents, processes, and outcomes. Patients and clinicians completed semi-structured interviews about decision-making around ablation, feelings of decision conflict and regret, and preferences for the content, delivery, and format of a hypothetical decision aid for ablation. Patients also completed surveys about AF symptoms and aspects of decision quality. Fifteen patients (mean age 71.1 ± 8.6 years; 27% female) and five clinicians were recruited. For most patients, decisional conflict and regret were low, but they also reported low levels of information and agency in the decision-making process. Most clinicians report routinely providing patients with information and encouraging engagement during consultations. Patients reported preferences for an interactive, web-based decision aid that clearly presents evidence regarding outcomes using data, visualizations, videos, and personalized risk assessments, and is available in multiple languages.

CONCLUSION

Disconnects between clinician efforts to provide information and bolster agency and patient experiences of decision-making suggest decision aids may be needed to improve decision quality in practice. Reported experiences with current decision-making practices and preferences for decision aid content, format, and delivery can support the user-centered design and development of a decision aid.

Assessment and Mitigation of Bleeding Risk in Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: Executive Summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper

While there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision for initiating and continuing anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static "one-off" assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by aging, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this executive summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with a view to summarizing "best practice" when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, and review established bleeding risk factors and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism, are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

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.

Assessment and mitigation of bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism: A Position Paper from the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis, in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care and the Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society

Whilst there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision to initiate and continue anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both the thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static 'one off' assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by ageing, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this Consensus Document, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with the view to summarizing 'best practice' when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, review established bleeding risk factors, and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

Returning Cardiac Rhythm Data to Patients: Opportunities and Challenges

Spurred by federal legislation, professional organizations, and patients themselves, patient access to data from electronic cardiac devices is increasingly transparent. Patients can collect data through consumer devices and access data traditionally shared only with health care providers. These data may improve screening, self-management, and shared decision-making for cardiac arrhythmias, but challenges remain, including patient comprehension, communication with providers, and sustained engagement. Ways to address these challenges include leveraging visualizations that support comprehension, involving patients in designing and developing patient-facing digital tools, and establishing clear practices and goals for data exchange with health care providers.

Drug prescription goals in primary care: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Care goals are often implicit, although their identification is a key element of any prescription process. This study aimed to describe the clinical goals of drug prescriptions in general practice, their determinants and the agreement between physicians and patients.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study conducted by 11 resident trainees acting as observers in 23 general practices. The residents recorded the indication and main physician's goal for all drugs prescribed during five consultation days in each practice in December 2015, and the main patient's goal for a sub-sample of consultations. We used an eight-category generic classification of prescription goals, including three specific (mortality, morbidity and cure), three non-specific (symptoms, quality of life, functioning) and two non-specified (other goal, no goal) categories. Analyses were based on a multivariable, multilevel model and on the kappa statistic applied to the sub-sample of consultations.

RESULTS

The sample encompassed 2141 consultations and 5036 drugs. The main physicians' goal of drug prescriptions was to relieve symptoms (43.3%). The other goals were to decrease the risk of morbidity (22.4%), to cure disease (11.7%), to improve quality of life (10.6%), to decrease the risk of mortality (8.5%) and to improve functioning (1.8%). The choice of a specific goal was more frequent in patients with the following characteristics: over 50 (OR [1.09;1.15]), of male gender (OR [1.09;1.39]), with full financial coverage for a long-term condition (OR [1.47;1.97]), known by the physician (OR [1.19;2.23]), or with a somatic health problem (OR [2.56;4.17]). Cohen's kappa for drug prescription goals between the patients and the physicians was 0.26 (0.23-0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians' goals are poorly shared with patients. It remains to be assessed whether it is possible to collect and discuss information on prescription goals on a daily basis.

Age, knowledge, preferences, and risk tolerance for invasive cardiac care

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The extent to which individual knowledge, preferences, and priorities explain lower use of invasive cardiac care among older vs. younger adults presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is unknown. We directly surveyed a group of patients to ascertain their preferences and priorities for invasive cardiovascular care.

DESIGN

We performed a prospective cohort study of adults hospitalized with ACS. We surveyed participants regarding their knowledge, preferences, goals, and concerns for cardiac care, as well as their risk tolerance for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

SETTING

Single academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Six hundred twenty-eight participants (373 <75 years old; 255 ≥75 years old).

MEASUREMENTS

We compared baseline characteristics, knowledge, priorities, and risk tolerance for care across age strata. We also assessed pairwise differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) between age groups for key variables of interest.

RESULTS

Compared with younger patients, older participants had less knowledge of invasive care; were less willing to consider cardiac catheterization (difference between 75-84 and< 65 years old: -7.8%, 95% CI: -14.4%,-1.3%; for ≥85 vs. <65: -15.7%, 95% CI: -29.8%,-1.6%), percutaneous coronary intervention (difference between 75-84 and< 65 years old: -12.8%, 95% CI: -20.8%,-4.8%; for ≥85 vs. <65: -24.8%, 95% CI: -41.2%,-8.5%), and CABG (difference between 75-84 and< 65 years old: -19.0%, 95% CI: -28.2%,-9.9%; for ≥85 vs. <65: -39.1%, 95% CI: -56.0%,-22.2%); and were more risk averse for CABG surgery (p < .001), albeit with substantial inter-individual variability and individual outliers. Many patients who stated they were not initially willing to undergo an invasive cardiovascular procedure actually ended up undergoing the procedure (49% for cardiac catheterization and 22% for PCI or CABG).

CONCLUSION

Age influences treatment goals and willingness to consider invasive cardiac care, as well as risk tolerance for CABG. Individuals' willingness to undergo invasive cardiovascular procedures loosely corresponds with whether that procedure is performed after discussion with the care team.

Effect of Low-Intensity vs Standard-Intensity Warfarin Prophylaxis on Venous Thromboembolism or Death Among Patients Undergoing Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

The optimal international normalized ratio (INR) to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in warfarin-treated patients with recent arthroplasty is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and efficacy of a target INR of 1.8 vs 2.5 for VTE prophylaxis after orthopedic surgery.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The randomized Genetic Informatics Trial (GIFT) of Warfarin to Prevent Deep Vein Thrombosis enrolled 1650 patients aged 65 years or older initiating warfarin for elective hip or knee arthroplasty at 6 US medical centers. Enrollment began in April 2011 and follow-up concluded in October 2016.

INTERVENTIONS

In a 2 × 2 factorial design, participants were randomized to a target INR of 1.8 (n = 823) or 2.5 (n = 827) and to either genotype-guided or clinically guided warfarin dosing. For the first 11 days of therapy, open-label warfarin dosing was guided by a web application.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the composite of VTE (within 60 days) or death (within 30 days). Participants underwent screening duplex ultrasound postoperatively. The hypothesis was that an INR target of 1.8 would be noninferior to an INR target of 2.5, using a noninferiority margin of 3% for the absolute risk of VTE. Secondary end points were bleeding and INR values of 4 or more.

RESULTS

Among 1650 patients who were randomized (mean age, 72.1 years; 1049 women [63.6%]; 1502 white [91.0%]), 1597 (96.8%) received at least 1 dose of warfarin and were included in the primary analysis. The rate of the primary composite outcome of VTE or death was 5.1% (41 of 804) in the low-intensity-warfarin group (INR target, 1.8) vs 3.8% (30 of 793) in the standard-treatment-warfarin group (INR target, 2.5), for a difference of 1.3% (1-sided 95% CI, -∞ to 3.05%, P = .06 for noninferiority). Major bleeding occurred in 0.4% of patients in the low-intensity group and 0.9% of patients in the standard-intensity group, for a difference of -0.5% (95% CI, -1.6% to 0.4%). The INR values of 4 or more occurred in 4.5% of patients in the low-intensity group and 12.2% of the standard-intensity group, for a difference of -7.8% (95% CI, -10.5% to -5.1%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among older patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty and receiving warfarin prophylaxis, an international normalized ratio goal of 1.8 compared with 2.5 did not meet the criterion for noninferiority for risk of the composite outcome of VTE or death. However, the trial may have been underpowered to meet this criterion and further research may be warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01006733.

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.

Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication: Validation of the Translated Arabic Version among Patients Undergoing Warfarin Therapy in Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVES

To validate the psychometric properties of the translated Arabic version of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM 1.4) for patients on warfarin therapy in Saudi anticoagulation clinics (ACCs).

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted at the Security Forces Hospital ACC in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. It involved administering questionnaires related to patients' satisfaction and assessing adherence through interviews. The quality of the international normalized ratio control was assessed using the Rosendaal method. A psychometric evaluation of TSQM 1.4 was carried out, addressing internal consistency and known-groups and convergent validity.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients completed the questionnaire with an 80% response rate. The independent Cronbach α values for the effectiveness, side effects, and global satisfaction domains were consistently higher than 0.75, demonstrating good internal consistency and suitability of these domains for application in the current patients' setting. When these domains were used together in a multivariable logistic regression model of adherence, the only domain that remained significant was TSQM effectiveness (P = 0.017). Interestingly, a higher likelihood of moderate to optimal international normalized ratio control was significantly and independently associated with increased satisfaction scores in the effectiveness and convenience domains, but not in the side effects and global satisfaction domains.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence in favor of the reliability and validity of the Arabic version of TSQM 1.4 as a useful measure of satisfaction with anticoagulant therapy in patients visiting ACCs. The TSQM subscales in this patient setting seem to detect a clinically meaningful change over time, enhancing the potential of their use in routine practice.

Screening strategies for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common cardiac arrhythmia that increases the risk of thromboembolic events. Anticoagulation therapy to prevent AF-related stroke has been shown to be cost-effective. A national screening programme for AF may prevent AF-related events, but would involve a substantial investment of NHS resources.

Objectives

To conduct a systematic review of the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of screening tests for AF, update a systematic review of comparative studies evaluating screening strategies for AF, develop an economic model to compare the cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies and review observational studies of AF screening to provide inputs to the model.

Design

Systematic review, meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Setting

Primary care.

Participants

Adults.

Intervention

Screening strategies, defined by screening test, age at initial and final screens, screening interval and format of screening {systematic opportunistic screening [individuals offered screening if they consult with their general practitioner (GP)] or systematic population screening (when all eligible individuals are invited to screening)}.

Main outcome measures

Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratios; the odds ratio of detecting new AF cases compared with no screening; and the mean incremental net benefit compared with no screening.

Review methods

Two reviewers screened the search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. A DTA meta-analysis was perfomed, and a decision tree and Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the screening strategies.

Results

Diagnostic test accuracy depended on the screening test and how it was interpreted. In general, the screening tests identified in our review had high sensitivity (> 0.9). Systematic population and systematic opportunistic screening strategies were found to be similarly effective, with an estimated 170 individuals needed to be screened to detect one additional AF case compared with no screening. Systematic opportunistic screening was more likely to be cost-effective than systematic population screening, as long as the uptake of opportunistic screening observed in randomised controlled trials translates to practice. Modified blood pressure monitors, photoplethysmography or nurse pulse palpation were more likely to be cost-effective than other screening tests. A screening strategy with an initial screening age of 65 years and repeated screens every 5 years until age 80 years was likely to be cost-effective, provided that compliance with treatment does not decline with increasing age.

Conclusions

A national screening programme for AF is likely to represent a cost-effective use of resources. Systematic opportunistic screening is more likely to be cost-effective than systematic population screening. Nurse pulse palpation or modified blood pressure monitors would be appropriate screening tests, with confirmation by diagnostic 12-lead electrocardiography interpreted by a trained GP, with referral to a specialist in the case of an unclear diagnosis. Implementation strategies to operationalise uptake of systematic opportunistic screening in primary care should accompany any screening recommendations.

Limitations

Many inputs for the economic model relied on a single trial [the Screening for Atrial Fibrillation in the Elderly (SAFE) study] and DTA results were based on a few studies at high risk of bias/of low applicability.

Future work

Comparative studies measuring long-term outcomes of screening strategies and DTA studies for new, emerging technologies and to replicate the results for photoplethysmography and GP interpretation of 12-lead electrocardiography in a screening population.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013739.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Satisfaction, quality of life and perception of patients regarding burdens and benefits of vitamin K antagonists compared with direct oral anticoagulants in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

AIM

To compare the satisfaction of patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) with that of patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and to determine the impact on quality of life of both treatments in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).

METHODS

Cross-sectional multicenter study in which outpatients with NVAF completed the ACTS (Anti-Clot Treatment Scale), SAT-Q (Satisfaction Questionnaire) and EQ-5D-3L (EuroQol 5 dimensions questionnaire, 3 level version) questionnaires.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 1337 patients, of whom 587 were taking DOACs and 750 VKAs. Compared with VKAs, DOACs were more commonly prescribed in patients with a history of stroke and in patients with a higher thromboembolic risk. The study scores were as follows: SAT-Q: 63.8 ± 17.8; EQ-5D-3L total score: 75.6 ± 20.9; visual analog scale: 63.1 ± 20.6; ACTS Burdens: 51.8 ± 8.4 and ACTS Benefits: 11.9 ± 2.4. The ACTS Burdens score and ACTS Benefits score were higher with DOACs than with VKAs (54.83 ± 6.11 vs 49.50 ± 9.15; p < 0.001 and 12.36 ± 2.34 vs 11.48 ± 2.46; p < 0.001 respectively).

CONCLUSION

NVAF patients treated with oral anticoagulants had many comorbidities and a high thromboembolic risk. Satisfaction and quality of life with oral anticoagulants were high, although they were both better with DOACs than with VKAs.

Patient Preferences for Oral Anticoagulation Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Since the introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants (NOACs), an additional treatment option, apart from VKAs, has become available for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). For various reasons, it is important to consider patients' preferences regarding type of medication, particularly in view of the established relationship between preferences towards treatment, associated burden of treatment, and treatment adherence. This review aimed to systematically analyse the scientific literature assessing the preferences of AF patients with regard to long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE databases (from 1980 to 2015), added records from reference lists of publications found, and conducted a systematic review based on all identified publications. Outcomes of interest included any quantitative information regarding the opinions or preferences of AF patients towards OAC treatment, ideally specified according to different clinical or convenience attributes describing different OAC treatment options.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 publications describing the results of studies conducted in 12 different countries were included in our review. Among these, 16 studies analysed patient preferences towards OACs in general. These studies predominantly assessed which benefits (mainly lower stroke risk) AF patients would require to tolerate harms (mainly higher bleeding risk) associated with an OAC. Most studies showed that patients were willing to accept higher bleeding risks if a certain threshold in stroke risk reduction could be reached. Nevertheless, most of the publications also showed that the preferences of AF patients towards OACs may differ from the perspective of clinical guidelines or the perspective of physicians. The remaining 11 studies included in our review assessed the preferences of AF patients towards specific OAC medication options, namely NOACs versus VKAs. Our review showed that AF patients prefer easy-to-administer treatments, such as treatments that are applied once daily without any food/drug interactions and without the need for bridging and frequent blood controls.

CONCLUSION

Stroke risk reduction and a moderate increase in the risk of bleeding are the most important attributes for an AF patient when deciding whether they are for or against OAC treatment. If different anticoagulation options have similar clinical characteristics, convenience attributes matter to patients. In this review, AF patients favour attribute levels that describe NOAC treatment.

Selecting antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: Health professionals' feedback on a decision support tool

A Computerised Antithrombotic Risk Assessment Tool was developed for assisting the selection of antithrombotic therapy based on the risk versus benefit assessment. In view of the recent availability of the novel oral anticoagulants, this tool has been updated to CARATV2.0. To explore health professionals' perspectives on the tool, semi-structured interviews were conducted in seven pharmacists, seven specialists, six general practitioners and six nurses, who were involved in management of antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation. Three overarching themes emerged: (1) CARATV2.0 provides comprehensive structured assessment of patients and could assist with the prescription and review of antithrombotic therapy, (2) subjective issues such as health professionals' and patients' preferences for a particular antithrombotic therapy may affect the usefulness of CARATV2.0 and (3) CARATV2.0 requires integration into existing systems and processes. The majority of health professionals surveyed would like to use CARATV2.0 in practice, believing it would improve antithrombotic use and might reduce stroke incidence.

Patient Preferences for Oral Anticoagulation Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Since the introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants (NOACs), an additional treatment option, apart from VKAs, has become available for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). For various reasons, it is important to consider patients' preferences regarding type of medication, particularly in view of the established relationship between preferences towards treatment, associated burden of treatment, and treatment adherence. This review aimed to systematically analyse the scientific literature assessing the preferences of AF patients with regard to long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE databases (from 1980 to 2015), added records from reference lists of publications found, and conducted a systematic review based on all identified publications. Outcomes of interest included any quantitative information regarding the opinions or preferences of AF patients towards OAC treatment, ideally specified according to different clinical or convenience attributes describing different OAC treatment options.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 publications describing the results of studies conducted in 12 different countries were included in our review. Among these, 16 studies analysed patient preferences towards OACs in general. These studies predominantly assessed which benefits (mainly lower stroke risk) AF patients would require to tolerate harms (mainly higher bleeding risk) associated with an OAC. Most studies showed that patients were willing to accept higher bleeding risks if a certain threshold in stroke risk reduction could be reached. Nevertheless, most of the publications also showed that the preferences of AF patients towards OACs may differ from the perspective of clinical guidelines or the perspective of physicians. The remaining 11 studies included in our review assessed the preferences of AF patients towards specific OAC medication options, namely NOACs versus VKAs. Our review showed that AF patients prefer easy-to-administer treatments, such as treatments that are applied once daily without any food/drug interactions and without the need for bridging and frequent blood controls.

CONCLUSION

Stroke risk reduction and a moderate increase in the risk of bleeding are the most important attributes for an AF patient when deciding whether they are for or against OAC treatment. If different anticoagulation options have similar clinical characteristics, convenience attributes matter to patients. In this review, AF patients favour attribute levels that describe NOAC treatment.

Subjective and objective knowledge and decisional role preferences in cerebrovascular patients compared to controls

BACKGROUND

Risk knowledge and active role preferences are important for patient involvement in treatment decision-making and adherence. Although knowledge about stroke warning signs and risk factors has received considerable attention, objective knowledge on secondary prevention and further self-esteem subjective knowledge have rarely been studied. The aim of our study was to investigate knowledge and treatment decisional role preferences in cerebrovascular patients compared to controls.

METHODS

We performed a survey on subjective and objective stroke risk knowledge and autonomy preferences in cerebrovascular patients from our stroke outpatient clinic (n=262) and from pedestrians on the street taken as controls during a "World Stroke Day" (n=274). The questionnaire includes measures for knowledge and decisional role preferences from previously published questionnaires and newly developed measures, for example, subjective knowledge, revealed on a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

The overall stroke knowledge was low to moderate, with no differences between patients and controls. Knowledge about secondary prevention was particularly low. Only 10%-15% of participants correctly estimated the stroke absolute risk reduction potential of aspirin. The medical data interpretation competence was moderate in both groups. Age and basic mathematical and statistical understanding (numeracy) were the only independent predictors of objective stroke knowledge, whereas previous stroke had no impact on stroke knowledge. However, patients were thought to be better informed than controls. Approximately 60% of both patients and controls claimed to prefer a shared decision-making approach in treatment decisions.

CONCLUSION

The level of stroke risk knowledge in patients with cerebrovascular diseases was as low as in randomly selected pedestrians, although patients felt better informed. Both groups preferred involvement in treatment decision-making. We conclude that educational concepts for increasing awareness of knowledge gaps as well as for stroke risk and for prevention strategies are needed.

Values and preferences for oral antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: physician and patient perspectives

BACKGROUND

Exploration of values and preferences in the context of anticoagulation therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) remains limited. To better characterize the distribution of patient and physician values and preferences relevant to decisions regarding anticoagulation in patients with AF, we conducted interviews with patients at risk of developing AF and physicians who manage patients with AF.

METHODS

We interviewed 96 outpatients and 96 physicians in a multicenter study and elicited the maximal increased risk of bleeding (threshold risk) that respondents would tolerate with warfarin vs. aspirin to achieve a reduction in three strokes in 100 patients over a 2-year period. We used the probabilistic version of the threshold technique.

RESULTS

The median threshold risk for both patients and physicians was 10 additional bleeds (10 P = 0.7). In both groups, we observed large variability in the threshold number of bleeds, with wider variability in patients than clinicians [patient range: 0-100, physician range: 0-50]. We observed one cluster of patients and physicians who would tolerate <10 bleeds and another cluster of patients, but not physicians, who would accept more than 35.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest wide variability in patient and physician values and preferences regarding the trade-off between strokes and bleeds. Results suggest that in individual decision making, physician and patient values and preferences will often be discordant; this mandates tailoring treatment to the individual patient's preferences.

Women's values and preferences for thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy: a comparison of direct-choice and decision analysis using patient specific utilities

BACKGROUND

Women with a history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) have an increased recurrence risk during pregnancy. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) reduces this risk, but is costly, burdensome, and may increase risk of bleeding. The decision to start thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy is sensitive to women's values and preferences. Our objective was to compare women's choices using a holistic approach in which they were presented all of the relevant information (direct-choice) versus a personalized decision analysis in which a mathematical model incorporated their preferences and VTE risk to make a treatment recommendation.

METHODS

Multicenter, international study. Structured interviews were on women with a history of VTE who were pregnant, planning, or considering pregnancy. Women indicated their willingness to receive thromboprophylaxis based on scenarios using personalized estimates of VTE recurrence and bleeding risks. We also obtained women's values for health outcomes using a visual analog scale. We performed individualized decision analyses for each participant and compared model recommendations to decisions made when presented with the direct-choice exercise.

RESULTS

Of the 123 women in the study, the decision model recommended LMWH for 51 women and recommended against LMWH for 72 women. 12% (6/51) of women for whom the decision model recommended thromboprophylaxis chose not to take LMWH; 72% (52/72) of women for whom the decision model recommended against thromboprophylaxis chose LMWH.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a high degree of discordance between decisions in the direct-choice exercise and decision model recommendations. Although which approach best captures individuals' true values remains uncertain, personalized decision support tools presenting results based on personalized risks and values may improve decision making.

Developing an Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Support Tool (AFGuST) for shared decision making

OBJECTIVE

Patient values and preferences are an important component to decision making when tradeoffs exist that impact quality of life, such as tradeoffs between stroke prevention and hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) contemplating anticoagulant therapy. Our objective is to describe the development of an Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Support Tool (AFGuST) to assist the process of integrating patients' preferences into this decision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CHA2DS2VASc and HAS-BLED were used to calculate risks for stroke and hemorrhage. We developed a Markov decision analytic model as a computational engine to integrate patient-specific risk for stroke and hemorrhage and individual patient values for relevant outcomes in decisions about anticoagulant therapy.

RESULTS

Individual patient preferences for health-related outcomes may have greater or lesser impact on the choice of optimal antithrombotic therapy, depending upon the balance of patient-specific risks for ischemic stroke and major bleeding. These factors have been incorporated into patient-tailored booklets which, along with an informational video, were developed through an iterative process with clinicians and patient focus groups.

KEY LIMITATIONS

Current risk prediction models for hemorrhage, such as the HAS-BLED, used in the AFGuST, do not incorporate all potentially significant risk factors. Novel oral anticoagulant agents recently approved for use in the United States, Canada, and Europe have not been included in the AFGuST. Rather, warfarin has been used as a conservative proxy for all oral anticoagulant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

We present a proof of concept that a patient-tailored decision-support tool could bridge the gap between guidelines and practice by incorporating individual patient's stroke and bleeding risks and their values for major bleeding events and stroke to facilitate a shared decision making process. If effective, the AFGuST could be used as an adjunct to published guidelines to enhance patient-centered conversations about the anticoagulation management.

Rethinking composite end points in clinical trials: insights from patients and trialists

BACKGROUND

Many clinical trials use composite end points to reduce sample size, but the relative importance of each individual end point within the composite may differ between patients and researchers.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We asked 785 cardiovascular patients and 164 clinical trial authors to assign 25 "spending weights" across 5 common adverse events comprising composite end points in cardiovascular trials: death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, and hospitalization for angina. We then calculated end point ratios for each participant's ratings of each nonfatal end point relative to death. Whereas patients assigned an average weight of 5 to death, equal or greater weight was assigned to myocardial infarction (mean ratio, 1.12) and stroke (ratio, 1.08). In contrast, clinical trialists were much more concerned about death (average weight, 8) than myocardial infarction (ratio, 0.63) or stroke (ratio, 0.53). Both patients and trialists considered revascularization (ratio, 0.48 and 0.20, respectively) and hospitalization (ratio, 0.28 and 0.13, respectively) as substantially less severe than death. Differences between patient and trialist end point weights persisted after adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics (P<0.001 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and clinical trialists did not weigh individual components of a composite end point equally. Whereas trialists are most concerned about avoiding death, patients place equal or greater importance on reducing myocardial infarction or stroke. Both groups considered revascularization and hospitalization as substantially less severe. These findings suggest that equal weights in a composite clinical end point do not accurately reflect the preferences of either patients or trialists.

Characteristics affecting oral anticoagulant therapy choice among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a retrospective claims analysis

Background

Dabigatran is one of the three newer oral anticoagulants (OACs) recently approved in the United States for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. The objective of this study was to identify patient, healthcare provider, and health plan factors associated with dabigatran versus warfarin use among NVAF patients.

Methods

Administrative claims data from patients with ≥2 NVAF medical claims in the HealthCore Integrated Research Database between 10/1/2009 and 10/31/2011 were analyzed. During the study intake period (10/1/2010 - 10/31/2011), dabigatran patients had ≥2 dabigatran prescriptions, warfarin patients had ≥2 warfarin and no dabigatran prescriptions, and the first oral anticoagulant (OAC) prescription date was the index date. Continuous enrollment for 12 months preceding (“pre-index”) and ≥ 6 months following the index date was required. Patients without pre-index warfarin use were assigned to the ‘OAC-naïve’ subgroup. Separate analyses were performed for ‘all-patient’ and ‘OAC-naïve’ cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression (LR) identified factors associated with dabigatran versus warfarin use.

Results

Of 20,320 patients (3,019 dabigatran and 17,301 warfarin) who met study criteria, 27% of dabigatran and 13% of warfarin patients were OAC-naïve. Among all-patients, dabigatran patients were younger (mean 67 versus 73 years, p < 0.001), predominantly male (71% versus 61%, p < 0.001), and more frequently had a cardiologist prescriber (51% versus 30%, p < 0.001) than warfarin patients. Warfarin patients had higher pre-index Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (mean: 4.3 versus 4.0, p < 0.001) and higher ATRIA bleeding risk score (mean: 3.0 versus 2.3, p < 0.001). LR results were generally consistent between all- and OAC-naïve patients. Among OAC-naïve patients, strongest factors associated with dabigatran use were prescriber specialty (OR = 3.59, 95% CI 2.68-4.81 for cardiologist; OR = 2.22, 95% CI 1.65-2.97 for other specialist), health plan type (OR = 1.47 95% CI 1.10-1.96 for preferred provider organization), and prior ischemic stroke (OR = 1.42, 95% CI 1.06-1.90). Older age decreased the probability of dabigatran use.

Conclusions

Beside patient characteristics, cardiology specialty of the prescribing physician and health plan type were the strongest factors associated with dabigatran use.

Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk and Evidence-based Management of Cholesterol

An elevated level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol is directly associated with development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, which may present as coronary heart disease, stroke, and peripheral arterial disease. The new cholesterol management guidelines from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association aim to address a comprehensive approach to prevent and reduce the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The new guidelines recommend initiation of heart healthy lifestyle modifications and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme-A reductase inhibitor ("statin") therapy in individuals who are at a high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. It is estimated that these guidelines could result in "statin" therapy for one in every three adults in the United States. This article presents a review of the current cholesterol management guidelines, recommendations from relevant randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses obtained from the searches in Medline/PubMed and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and publications from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service, and the United States Preventive Services Task Force.

Evaluation of patients' attitudes towards stroke prevention and bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation

Patient's values and preferences regarding the relative importance of preventing strokes and avoiding bleeding are now recognised to be of great importance in deciding on therapy for the prevention of stroke due to atrial fibrillation (SPAF). We used an iPad questionnaire to determine the minimal clinically important difference (Treatment Threshold) and the maximum number of major bleeding events that a patient would be willing to endure in order to prevent one stroke (Bleeding Ratio) for the initiation of antithrombotic therapy in 172 hospital in-patients with documented non-valvular atrial fibrillation in whom anticoagulant therapy was being considered. Patients expressed strong opinions regarding SPAF. We found that 12% of patients were "medication averse" and were not willing to consider antithrombotic therapy; even if it was 100% effective in preventing strokes. Of those patients who were willing to consider antithrombotic therapy, 42% were identified as "risk averse" and 15% were "risk tolerant". Patients required at least a 0.8% (NNT=125) annual absolute risk reduction and 15% relative risk reduction in the risk of stroke in order to agree to initiate antithrombotic therapy, and patients were willing to endure 4.4 major bleeds in order to prevent one stroke. In conclusion, there was a substantial amount of inter-patient variability, and often extreme differences in opinion regarding tolerance of bleeding risk in the context of stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. These findings highlight the importance of considering patient preferences when deciding on SPAF therapy.

Patient Satisfaction with Warfarin- and Non–Warfarin-Containing Thromboprophylaxis Regimens for Atrial Fibrillation

Objective

To compare patient-reported limitations, concerns, and burdens in those receiving and not receiving warfarin for thromboprophylaxis in atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of patients with AF receiving thromboprophylaxis for stroke prevention. Patients were administered the validated Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS). Mean scores of patients receiving and not receiving warfarin were compared for each ACTS item, and for the Burden and Benefit subscales.

Results

From July 2010 to August 2011, 80 patients with AF were administered the survey, with 65 patients receiving a regimen containing warfarin and 15 patients not receiving a regimen containing warfarin. Six of the 17 individual questions depicting patient- perceived limitations in physical activity due to bleeding, limitations on diet, feelings of inconvenience of occasional aspects of thromboprophylaxis therapy, and frustration, and burden had less favorable scores in the warfarin-managed patients compared with the patients not receiving warfarin ( P < 0.05 for all). Mean ACTS Burden scores were more favorable in the no-warfarin group (44.5 ± 6.4) compared with the warfarin group (39.8 ± 8.0; P = 0.003). No difference was seen between the 2 groups on the ACTS Benefits score (11.1 ± 3.4 vs 10.4 ± 3.7; P = 0.38).

Conclusion

Patients with AF receiving warfarin may have less favorable feelings regarding thromboprophylaxis versus those receiving non-warfarin thromboprophylaxis. Patients report having more limitations and having greater feelings of burden on warfarin.

How to ask: older adults' preferred tools in health outcome prioritization

OBJECTIVE

To assess older adults' attitudes toward eliciting health outcome priorities.

METHODS

This observational cohort study of 356 community-living adults age ≥65 included three tools: (1) Health Outcomes: ranking four outcomes (survival, function, freedom from pain, and freedom from other symptoms); (2) Now vs. Later: rating importance of current versus future quality of life; (3) Attitude Scale: agreement with statements about health outcomes and current versus future health.

RESULTS

Whereas 41% preferred Health Outcomes, 40% preferred the Attitude Scale. Only 7-12% rated any tool as very hard or hard. In bivariate analysis, participants of non-white race and with lower education, health literacy, and functional status were significantly more likely to rate at least one of the tools as easy (p < .05). Across all tools, 17% of participants believed tools would change care. The main reason for thinking there would be no change was satisfaction with existing care (62%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is variability in how older persons wish to be asked about health outcome priorities. Few find this task difficult, and difficulty was not greater among participants with lower health literacy, education, or health status.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

By offering different tools, healthcare providers can help patients clarify their health outcome priorities.

Review of challenges in optimizing oral anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation

Oral anticoagulant therapy is the mainstay of stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation; it is highly effective at reducing stroke risk, but its use can be limited by increased risk of bleeding. As new oral anticoagulants are available, barriers to optimal use of oral anticoagulation therapy warrant consideration by healthcare professionals and administrators who are seeking to optimize the quality of care for patients with atrial fibrillation. Suboptimal use of oral anticoagulation therapy constitutes an important health problem with significant humanistic and economic consequences. Based on a review of the medical literature published between 2000 and 2011, this article summarizes the literature on the barriers to optimal use of oral anticoagulation therapy, describes the clinical and economic burdens that these barriers add to the burden of atrial fibrillation, and discusses how well the new oral anticoagulants may address some of these issues.

Why is warfarin underused for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation? A detailed review of electronic medical records

OBJECTIVE

Automated electronic queries of structured data fields in electronic medical records (EMR) found no barriers to warfarin in 42% of patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF) with moderate or high risk of stroke and no warfarin. A thorough manual review of records (including text reports) from the same EMR may better identify physicians' reasons for not using warfarin.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, retrospective, manual EMR review. Patients identified in a previous automated EMR study with a CHADS2 (Chronic heart failure, Hypertension, Age >75 years, Diabetes mellitus, Stroke) score≥2, no record of warfarin, no barrier to warfarin use, and (in the present study) confirmation of AF diagnosis were included in the manual EMR review. A structured chart abstraction form was used to extract data visible in the clinicians' EMR user interface. Reasons why warfarin had not been prescribed were reported using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Among 408 patients with 'no barriers' to warfarin in the automated EMR review, AF diagnosis was confirmed in 319 patients (mean age 74.8; 65% female). Forty-one percent (n=132) did not have chart records explaining why they were not on warfarin. Among the 59% (187) with a rationale against warfarin found in the records, the most common category (52%) was indicative of the risk of bleeding, either risk of fall or history of recent bleeding. The second most common category (16%) reflected that the patient was back in sinus rhythm. These findings are subject to inherent limitations of retrospective chart reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients with AF and moderate-to-high risk of stroke are not treated with warfarin, and reasons for not using warfarin could not always be identified in patient records. Among patients with documented reasons, risk of bleeding (risk of fall or recent bleeding) was the most common category.

Evaluating patient values and preferences for thromboprophylaxis decision making during pregnancy: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women with prior venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at risk of recurrence. Low molecular weight heparin (LWMH) reduces the risk of pregnancy-related VTE. LMWH prophylaxis is, however, inconvenient, uncomfortable, costly, medicalizes pregnancy, and may be associated with increased risks of obstetrical bleeding. Further, there is uncertainty in the estimates of both the baseline risk of pregnancy-related recurrent VTE and the effects of antepartum LMWH prophylaxis. The values and treatment preferences of pregnant women, crucial when making recommendations for prophylaxis, are currently unknown. The objective of this study is to address this gap in knowledge.

METHODS

We will perform a multi-center cross-sectional interview study in Canada, USA, Norway and Finland. The study population will consist of 100 women with a history of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), and who are either pregnant, planning pregnancy, or may in the future consider pregnancy (women between 18 and 45 years). We will exclude individuals who are on full dose anticoagulation or thromboprophylaxis, who have undergone surgical sterilization, or whose partners have undergone vasectomy. We will determine each participant's willingness to receive LMWH prophylaxis during pregnancy through direct choice exercises based on real life and hypothetical scenarios, preference-elicitation using a visual analog scale ("feeling thermometer"), and a probability trade-off exercise. The primary outcome will be the minimum reduction (threshold) in VTE risk at which women change from declining to accepting LMWH prophylaxis. We will explore possible determinants of this choice, including educational attainment, the characteristics of the women's prior VTE, and prior experience with LMWH. We will determine the utilities that women place on the burden of LMWH prophylaxis, pregnancy-related DVT, pregnancy-related PE and pregnancy-related hemorrhage. We will generate a "personalized decision analysis" using participants' utilities and their personalized risk of recurrent VTE as inputs to a decision analytic model. We will compare the personalized decision analysis to the participant's stated choice.

DISCUSSION

The preferences of pregnant women at risk of VTE with respect to the use of antithrombotic therapy remain unexplored. This research will provide explicit, quantitative expressions of women's valuations of health states related to recurrent VTE and its prevention with LMWH. This information will be crucial for both guideline developers and for clinicians.

Aspirin versus warfarin in atrial fibrillation: decision analysis may help patients' choice

BACKGROUND

the primary prevention of ischaemic stroke in chronic non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) typically involves consideration of aspirin or warfarin. CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc estimates annual stroke rates for untreated AF patients, which are reduced by 60% with warfarin and by 20% with aspirin. HAS-BLED estimates annual rates of major bleeding on warfarin. The latter risk with aspirin is 0.5-1.2% per year.

HYPOTHESIS

given a 'warfarin, aspirin or no therapy' choice, AF patients will prefer the option that maximises the annual probability of not having a stroke and not having a major bleed.

METHODS

decision tree applied to the 60 possible combinations of CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc and HAS-BLED scores.

RESULTS

according to the pre-specified hypothesis, when CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc is <2, the balance of risk and benefit would advise no treatment; when CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc is 2 or 3, warfarin would be best when HAS-BLED <2, otherwise no treatment would be advised; for CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc =4, warfarin would be best when HAS-BLED <3, otherwise no treatment would be advised and for CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc ≥5, warfarin would be the preferred option if HAS-BLED <4, otherwise aspirin would be advised.

CONCLUSION

this theoretical exercise illustrates the potential benefit of decision analysis in an area where high complexity and uncertainty still remain.

Engaging older people in decisions about their healthcare: the case for shared decision making

Shared decision making in clinical practice involves both the healthcare professional, an expert in the clinical condition and the patient who is an expert in what is important to them. A consultation involving shared decision making enables an examination of the options available, consideration of the risks and benefits whilst incorporating the values of the patient into the decision making process. A decision is aimed at, which is both clinically appropriate and is congruent with the patient's values.

Older people have been shown to value involvement, to varying degrees, in decisions about their care and treatment. The case of atrial fibrillation shows the opportunities for, and benefits of, sharing with older people decision making about their healthcare.

Development of a tool to improve the quality of decision making in atrial fibrillation

Background

Decision-making about appropriate therapy to reduce the stroke risk associated with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) involves the consideration of trade-offs among the benefits, risks, and inconveniences of different treatment options. The objective of this paper is to describe the development of a decision support tool for NVAF based on the provision of individualized risk estimates for stroke and bleeding and on preparing patients to communicate with their physicians about their values and potential treatment options.

Methods

We developed a tool based on the principles of the International Patient Decision Aids Standards. The tool focuses on the patient-physician dyad as the decision-making unit and emphasizes improving the interaction between the two. It is built on the recognition that the application of patient values to a specific treatment decision is complex and that the final treatment choice is best made through a process of patient-clinician communication.

Results

The tool provides education incorporating patients ' illness perceptions to explain the relationship between NVAF and stroke, and then presents individualized risk estimates, derived using separate risk calculators for stroke and bleeding over a clinically meaningful time period (5 years) associated with no treatment, aspirin, and warfarin. Sequelae of both stroke and bleeding outcomes are also described. Patients are encouraged to verbalize how they value the incremental risks and benefits associated with each option and write down specific concerns to address with their physician. A physician prompt to encourage patients to discuss their opinions is included as part of the decision support tool. In pilot testing with 11 participants (mean age 78 ± 9 years, 64% with ≤ high-school education), 8 (72%) rated ease of completion as "very easy," and 9 (81%) rated amount of information as "just right."

Conclusions

The risks and benefits of different treatment options for reduction of stroke in NVAF vary widely according to patients' comorbidities. This tool facilitates the provision of individualized outcome data and encourages patients to communicate with their physicians about these risks and benefits. Future studies will examine whether use of the tool is associated with improved quality of decision making.

A CTSA agenda to advance methods for comparative effectiveness research

Clinical research needs to be more useful to patients, clinicians, and other decision makers. To meet this need, more research should focus on patient-centered outcomes, compare viable alternatives, and be responsive to individual patients' preferences, needs, pathobiology, settings, and values. These features, which make comparative effectiveness research (CER) fundamentally patient-centered, challenge researchers to adopt or develop methods that improve the timeliness, relevance, and practical application of clinical studies. In this paper, we describe 10 priority areas that address 3 critical needs for research on patient-centered outcomes (PCOR): (1) developing and testing trustworthy methods to identify and prioritize important questions for research; (2) improving the design, conduct, and analysis of clinical research studies; and (3) linking the process and outcomes of actual practice to priorities for research on patient-centered outcomes. We argue that the National Institutes of Health, through its clinical and translational research program, should accelerate the development and refinement of methods for CER by linking a program of methods research to the broader portfolio of large, prospective clinical and health system studies it supports. Insights generated by this work should be of enormous value to PCORI and to the broad range of organizations that will be funding and implementing CER.

Effects of benefits and harms on older persons' willingness to take medication for primary cardiovascular prevention

BACKGROUND

Quality-assurance initiatives encourage adherence to evidenced-based guidelines based on a consideration of treatment benefit. We examined older persons' willingness to take medication for primary cardiovascular disease prevention according to benefits and harms.

METHODS

In-person interviews were performed with 356 community-living older persons. Participants were asked about their willingness to take medication for primary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI) with varying benefits in terms of absolute 5-year risk reduction and varying harms in terms of type and severity of adverse effects.

RESULTS

Most (88%) would take medication, providing an absolute benefit of 6 fewer persons with MI out of 100, approximating the average risk reduction of currently available medications. Of participants who would not take it, 17% changed their preference if the absolute benefit was increased to 10 fewer persons with MI, and, of participants who would take it, 82% remained willing if the absolute benefit was decreased to 3 fewer persons with MI. In contrast, large proportions (48%-69%) were unwilling or uncertain about taking medication with average benefit causing mild fatigue, nausea, or fuzzy thinking, and only 3% would take medication with adverse effects severe enough to affect functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

Older persons' willingness to take medication for primary cardiovascular disease prevention is relatively insensitive to its benefit but highly sensitive to its adverse effects. These results suggest that clinical guidelines and decisions about prescribing these medications to older persons need to place emphasis on both benefits and harms.

[Indications of vitamin K antagonists and aspirin in the atrial fibrillation of the elderly]

Non valvular atrial fibrillation is a public health concern because of the frequency and the severity of its embolic complications, particularly strokes. The aim of this paper is to analyze the recent recommendations for the prevention of embolic events and their application in the elderly. The recommendations for the prevention of stroke, published in 2001 on the basis of the results of randomized studies comparing vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and aspirin versus placebo, have been modified in August 2006. VKA are recommended in patients at high risk of stroke. In patients considered at moderate risk, the choice is now possible between VKA and aspirin, with a reduced dosage of aspirin (75 to 325 mg). The absolute risk of stroke related to age, hypertension, heart failure or diabetes is not yet evaluated. Further studies would be necessary in order to precise the recommendations for patients with only one of these risk factors: aspirin or VKA? In geriatric patients with several risk factors, VKA are under prescribed. A better knowledge of the embolic risk of atrial fibrillation, of the often overestimated hemorrhagic risk of VKA, of the quite underestimated hemorrhagic risk of aspirin and of the recommendations for prevention would be necessary.

The management of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in Australian general practice: bridging the evidence-practice gap. A national, representative postal survey

Background

General practitioners (GPs) are ideally placed to bridge the widely noted evidence-practice gap between current management of NVAF and the need to increase anticoagulant use to reduce the risk of fatal and disabling stroke in NVAF. We aimed to identify gaps in current care, and asked GPs to identify potentially useful strategies to overcome barriers to best practice.

Methods

We obtained contact details for a random sample of 1000 GPs from a national commercial data-base. Randomly selected GPs were mailed a questionnaire after an advance letter. Standardised reminders were administered to enhance response rates. As part of a larger survey assessing GP management of NVAF, we included questions to explore GPs' risk assessment, estimates of stroke risk and GPs' perceptions of the risks and benefits of anticoagulation with warfarin. In addition, we explored GPs' perceived barriers to the wider uptake of anticoagulation, quality control of anticoagulation and their assessment of strategies to assist in managing NVAF.

Results

596 out of 924 eligible GPs responded (64.4% response rate). The majority of GPs recognised that the benefits of warfarin outweighed the risks for three case scenarios in which warfarin is recommended according to Australian guidelines. In response to a hypothetical case scenario describing a patient with a supratherapeutic INR level of 5, 41.4% of the 596 GPs (n = 247) and 22.0% (n = 131) would be "highly likely" or "likely", respectively, to cease warfarin therapy and resume at a lower dose when INR levels are within therapeutic range. Only 27.9% (n = 166/596) would reassess the patient's INR levels within one day of recording the supratherapeutic INR. Patient contraindications to warfarin was reported to "usually" or "always" apply to the patients of 40.6% (n = 242/596) of GPs when considering whether or not to prescribe warfarin. Patient refusal to take warfarin "usually" or "always" applied to the patients of 22.3% (n = 133/596) of GPs. When asked to indicate the usefulness of strategies to assist in managing NVAF, the majority of GPs (89.1%, n = 531/596) reported that they would find patient educational resources outlining the benefits and risks of available treatments "quite useful" or "very useful". Just under two-thirds (65.2%; n = 389/596) reported that they would find point of care INR testing "quite" or "very" useful. An outreach specialist service and training to enable GPs to practice stroke medicine as a special interest were also considered to be "quite" or "very useful" by 61.9% (n = 369/596) GPs.

Conclusion

This survey identified gaps, based on GP self-report, in the current care of NVAF. GPs themselves have provided guidance on the selection of implementation strategies to bridge these gaps. These results may inform future initiatives designed to reduce the risk of fatal and disabling stroke in NVAF.