Key result
Clinical practices for informing atrial fibrillation patients about risk profiles and therapies varied across 53 European centres, with 80.2% prioritizing stroke and bleeding risk discussions.
Cross-Sectional (n=53)
Yes
This European survey highlights considerable diversity in clinical practices for informing AF patients about their risk profiles and therapies, indicating a need for optimized patient education strategies.
Variation in AF patient risk communication across Europe may influence care quality; leaves open benefits of uniform education strategies.
This European Heart Rhythm (EHRA) Scientific Initiatives Committee EP Wire Survey aimed at exploring the common practices in approaching patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and informing them about their risk profiles and available therapies in Europe. In the majority of 53 responding centres, patients were seen by cardiologists (86.8%) or arrhythmologists (64.2%). First- and follow-up visits most commonly lasted 21-30 and 11-20 min (41.5 and 69.8% of centres, respectively). In most centres (80.2%) stroke and bleeding risk had the highest priority for discussion with AF patients; 50.9% of centres had a structured patient education programme for stroke prevention. Individual patient stroke risk was assessed at every visit in 69.2% of the centres; 46.1% of centres had a hospital-based anticoagulation clinic. Information about non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) was communicated to all AF patients eligible for oral anticoagulation (38.5% of centres) or to warfarin-naive/unstable patients (42.3%). Only two centres (3.8%) had a structured NOAC adherence follow-up programme; in eight centres (15.4%) patients were requested to sign the statement they have been informed about the risks of non-adherence to NOAC therapy, and three centres (5.8%) had a patient education programme. Patient preferences were of the highest relevance regarding oral anticoagulation and AF ablation (64.7 and 49.0% of centres, respectively). This EP Wire Survey shows that in Europe considerable amount of time and resources are used in daily clinical practice to inform AF patients about their risk profile and available therapies. However, a diversity of strategies used across the European hospitals was noted, and further research is needed to better define optimal strategies for informing AF patients about their risk profile and treatment options.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Potpara et al. (2015) conducted a cross-sectional in Atrial fibrillation (n=53). Clinical practices for patient information and risk assessment was evaluated on Practices in approaching and informing patients with atrial fibrillation. Clinical practices for informing atrial fibrillation patients about risk profiles and therapies varied across 53 European centres, with 80.2% prioritizing stroke and bleeding risk discussions.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: