BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) guideline recommendations for antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are based on the effectiveness and safety of the AAD in patients with selected, concomitant heart disease. It is unknown to what extent these recommendations are being implemented in clinical practice. METHODS: Using commercial health claims, patients with AF were identified and then categorized into mutually exclusive, guideline-established subgroups based on their most serious concurrent heart disease: heart failure, coronary artery disease (CAD), hypertension, and no heart disease. Antiarrhythmic drug use after the first AF encounter and the identified concurrent heart disease encounter was determined from prescription claims, and this was compared with guideline recommendations. RESULTS: From January 2006 through December 2010, a total of 331,274 patients with AF aged < 65 years were identified: 18%, heart failure; 23%, CAD; 33%, hypertension; and 25%, no heart disease. Of these, 78,877 (24%) patients filled ≥ 1 qualifying AAD prescription. The median age was 57 years (interquartile range 52-61), and 69% were male. A total of 74,191 patients had AADs after both the AF and concurrent heart disease encounters: 27% with heart failure, 25% with CAD, 21% with hypertension, and 19% with no heart disease. In the heart failure and CAD subgroups, 45% and 31% of AADs were inconsistent with first- or second-line guideline recommendations, respectively. CONCLUSION: More than one-third of the AADs used in patients with AF and CAD or heart failure did not conform to guideline recommendations. This highlights the potential need for increased clinician education and intervention to improve the safe use of AADs for AF management.
BACKGROUND:Atrial fibrillation (AF) guideline recommendations for antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are based on the effectiveness and safety of the AAD in patients with selected, concomitant heart disease. It is unknown to what extent these recommendations are being implemented in clinical practice. METHODS: Using commercial health claims, patients with AF were identified and then categorized into mutually exclusive, guideline-established subgroups based on their most serious concurrent heart disease: heart failure, coronary artery disease (CAD), hypertension, and no heart disease. Antiarrhythmic drug use after the first AF encounter and the identified concurrent heart disease encounter was determined from prescription claims, and this was compared with guideline recommendations. RESULTS: From January 2006 through December 2010, a total of 331,274 patients with AF aged < 65 years were identified: 18%, heart failure; 23%, CAD; 33%, hypertension; and 25%, no heart disease. Of these, 78,877 (24%) patients filled ≥ 1 qualifying AAD prescription. The median age was 57 years (interquartile range 52-61), and 69% were male. A total of 74,191 patients had AADs after both the AF and concurrent heart disease encounters: 27% with heart failure, 25% with CAD, 21% with hypertension, and 19% with no heart disease. In the heart failure and CAD subgroups, 45% and 31% of AADs were inconsistent with first- or second-line guideline recommendations, respectively. CONCLUSION: More than one-third of the AADs used in patients with AF and CAD or heart failure did not conform to guideline recommendations. This highlights the potential need for increased clinician education and intervention to improve the safe use of AADs for AF management.
Authors: D G Wyse; A L Waldo; J P DiMarco; M J Domanski; Y Rosenberg; E B Schron; J C Kellen; H L Greene; M C Mickel; J E Dalquist; S D Corley Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-12-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Yoko Miyasaka; Marion E Barnes; Bernard J Gersh; Stephen S Cha; Kent R Bailey; Walter P Abhayaratna; James B Seward; Teresa S M Tsang Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-07-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Alan S Go; Dariush Mozaffarian; Véronique L Roger; Emelia J Benjamin; Jarett D Berry; William B Borden; Dawn M Bravata; Shifan Dai; Earl S Ford; Caroline S Fox; Sheila Franco; Heather J Fullerton; Cathleen Gillespie; Susan M Hailpern; John A Heit; Virginia J Howard; Mark D Huffman; Brett M Kissela; Steven J Kittner; Daniel T Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda D Lisabeth; David Magid; Gregory M Marcus; Ariane Marelli; David B Matchar; Darren K McGuire; Emile R Mohler; Claudia S Moy; Michael E Mussolino; Graham Nichol; Nina P Paynter; Pamela J Schreiner; Paul D Sorlie; Joel Stein; Tanya N Turan; Salim S Virani; Nathan D Wong; Daniel Woo; Melanie B Turner Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-01-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Hude Quan; Vijaya Sundararajan; Patricia Halfon; Andrew Fong; Bernard Burnand; Jean-Christophe Luthi; L Duncan Saunders; Cynthia A Beck; Thomas E Feasby; William A Ghali Journal: Med Care Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Nancy M Allen LaPointe; Laura Governale; Jerry Watkins; Jyotsna Mulgund; Kevin J Anstrom Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2007-08-20 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Nancy M Allen Lapointe; Jie-Lena Sun; Sigal Kaplan; Phil d'Almada; Sana M Al-Khatib Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2008-02-07 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Nancy M Allen LaPointe; David Dai; Laine Thomas; Jonathan P Piccini; Eric D Peterson; Sana M Al-Khatib Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2015-03-31
Authors: Nancy M Allen LaPointe; Dadi Dai; Laine Thomas; Jonathan P Piccini; Eric D Peterson; Sana M Al-Khatib Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2014-11-13 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Emilia Gvozdenović; Ron Wolterbeek; Désirée van der Heijde; Tom Huizinga; Cornelia Allaart; Robert Landewé Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2016-01-16 Impact factor: 2.362