Model-based cluster analysis of 196 patients with atrial fibrillation identified 4 distinct subgroups, including 66% doing well and 34% doing less well, who may benefit from tailored management.
Observational (n=196)
Can patients with atrial fibrillation be classified into distinct groups based on clinical and personal characteristics to tailor management?
Patients with atrial fibrillation can be classified into distinct clinical and behavioral clusters, highlighting the potential for tailored management approaches for those struggling with the condition.
Background: Examining characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has the potential to help in identifying groups of patients who might benefit from different management approaches. Methods: -VASc score, age, AF symptoms, overall health, mental health, AF knowledge, perceived stress, household and recreation activity, overall AF quality of life, and AF symptom treatment satisfaction. Follow-up analyses examined differences between the cluster groups in additional clinical variables. Results: Evidence emerged for both 2- and 4-cluster solutions. The 2-cluster solution involved a contrast between patients who were doing well on all variables (n = 129; 66%) vs those doing less well (n = 67; 34%). The 4-cluster solution provided a closer-up view of the data, showing that the group doing less well was split into 3 meaningfully different subgroups of patients who were managing in different ways. The final 4 clusters produced were as follows: (i) doing well; (ii) stressed and discontented; (iii) struggling and dissatisfied; and (iv) satisfied and complacent. Conclusions: Patients with AF can be accurately classified into distinct, natural groupings that vary in clinically important ways. Among the patients who were not managing well with AF, we found 3 distinct subgroups of patients who may benefit from tailored approaches to AF management and support. The tailoring of treatment approaches to specific personal and/or behavioural patterns, alongside clinical patterns, holds potential to improve patient outcomes (eg, treatment satisfaction).
Rush et al. (Sun,) conducted a observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=196). Model-based cluster analysis was evaluated on Identification of patient clusters based on clinical and personal characteristics. Model-based cluster analysis of 196 patients with atrial fibrillation identified 4 distinct subgroups, including 66% doing well and 34% doing less well, who may benefit from tailored management.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: