Does low personal income increase the risk of first-ever ischaemic stroke and overall mortality in patients with incident atrial fibrillation?
Low personal annual income is associated with a significantly increased risk of first-ever ischaemic stroke and overall mortality in patients with incident atrial fibrillation, particularly in those of working age.
BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic disparities can be associated with adverse outcomes in patients with cardiovascular diseases. The impact of personal income on the outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. METHODS: Nationwide observational registry-based study on patients with incident AF in Finland during 2007-2018. RESULTS: 203 154 patients (mean age 73.0±13.5; females 49.0%) were diagnosed with incident AF during the study period. Overall, 16 272 (8.0%) patients experienced first-ever ischaemic stroke and 63 420 (31.2%) died (mean follow-up 4.3±3.3 years). After adjusting for confounding factors, low personal income was associated with increased risk of overall mortality in all age strata and the incidence of first-ever stroke in patients aged <65 years and 65-74 years, but not in those ≥75 years. The magnitude of this effect was greatest in patients aged <65 years. After propensity score matching of patients <65 years in the lowest and highest quintiles of maximum personal annual income, at 10 years, those in the highest income quintile (≥€54 000) had significantly lower risk of first-ever stroke (subdistribution HR 0.495, 95% CI 0.391 to 0.628) and overall mortality (HR 0.307, 95% CI 0.269 to 0.351) compared with patients in the lowest income quintile (≤€12 000). CONCLUSIONS: Personal annual income has a significant impact on the incidence of first-ever ischaemic stroke and overall mortality among patients with incident AF, particularly among patients of working age. Low-income indicate the need for intervention strategies to improve outcomes of AF. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04645537.
Biancari et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: