Key result
Pharmacological treatment of atrial fibrillation lacks high-quality quality of life research, prompting the proposal of eight methodological criteria to address current study flaws.
Why the study?
Does pharmacological treatment improve quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Does pharmacological treatment improve quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Current research on quality of life in pharmacologically treated atrial fibrillation is methodologically flawed, necessitating stricter criteria for future studies.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia resulting in hospital admission. The mainstay of treatment for AF is pharmacological control with the aim of reducing symptoms, preventing complications and improving quality of life (QoL). However, the quality of QoL research in AF is suboptimal, and the impact of pharmacologic treatment on QoL is far from established. In the present review, basic definitions and instruments used in QoL research are introduced and the methodological problems in some of the more recent studies on QoL in AF are emphasized. Among these are heterogeneity of study groups, small sample size, lack of a control group and the use of nonvalidated QoL instruments. Finally, a set of eight criteria to be fulfilled when planning future studies on QoL in AF is proposed, criteria that hopefully may act as an inspiration for investigators planning future studies on QoL in pharmacologic treatment of AF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Engelmann et al. (2003) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation. Pharmacological treatment was evaluated on Quality of life. Pharmacological treatment of atrial fibrillation lacks high-quality quality of life research, prompting the proposal of eight methodological criteria to address current study flaws.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: