Key result
Management in an Atrial Fibrillation Special Clinic significantly increased novel oral anticoagulant utilization from 58.5% to 82.6% among high-risk atrial fibrillation patients.
Why the study?
Service gaps exist in AF management in Hong Kong with relatively low utilization of oral anticoagulants, prompting an evaluation of an Atrial Fibrillation Special Clinic on oral anticoagulant use and cardiovascular risk factor control.
Does management in an Atrial Fibrillation Special Clinic improve NOAC utilization and CVD risk factor control in high-risk AF patients?
Population
299 high risk AF patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score ≥2 in public primary care clinics
Comparison
Baseline vs after one year follow-up at an Atrial Fibrillation Special Clinic
Design
Quasi-experimental, pre-test/post-test study across 5 clinics
Follow-up
one year
Authors
Loading...
AFSC may improve OAC use and risk-factor control in high-risk AF; leaves open efficacy pending randomized confirmation.
Observational (n=299)
Yes
Does management in an Atrial Fibrillation Special Clinic improve NOAC utilization and CVD risk factor control in high-risk AF patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 82.6% vs 58.5%
p-value: p=<0.001
Lau et al. (2022) conducted an observational in High risk Atrial Fibrillation (n=299). Atrial Fibrillation Special Clinic (AFSC) management vs. Baseline (pre-intervention) was evaluated on Total number of patients agreed for novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) treatment (p=<0.001). Management in an Atrial Fibrillation Special Clinic significantly increased novel oral anticoagulant utilization from 58.5% to 82.6% among high-risk atrial fibrillation patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: