Key result
Extensive stroke prevention education linked to ~52% higher guideline-adherent antithrombotic management in AF.
Why the study?
Despite broad consensus on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, antithrombotic management remains imperfect with many patients at high stroke risk not optimally treated.
Does a clinical audit and education programme improve correct antithrombotic management in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Observational (n=370)
No
Does a clinical audit and education programme improve correct antithrombotic management in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 73% vs 48%
p-value: p=< 0.00001
A clinical audit and education program significantly improved adherence to antithrombotic guidelines for atrial fibrillation, highlighting a strategy to reduce stroke risk in clinical practice.
May support education programmes to improve AF antithrombotic adherence; leaves open need for RCTs on outcomes.
The aim of the study was to assess the extent to which published recommendations on the antithrombotic management of atrial fibrillation had been adopted into clinical practice in a busy district general hospital, and the impact of clinical audit on subsequent management. In the initial audit, 185 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation were studied using their case notes to identify any further clinical risk factors for stroke. A management algorithm stratified patients with atrial fibrillation into high, moderate, or low risk of stroke according to the individual stroke risk factors. For patients at high risk, the correct treatment is warfarin unless there are specific contraindications. For patients at moderate risk, the correct management is aspirin unless there are specific contraindications. Patients at low risk should receive no thromboprophylaxis. The clinical risks of stroke and thromboprophylaxis on discharge from hospital were recorded. An extensive education programme on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation was undertaken. Six months later a further 185 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation were audited. Overall, a large proportion (306/370; 83%) of patients were at high risk of stroke. In the initial audit, antithrombotic management was correct in 89 patients (48%). In the follow up audit, antithrombotic management was correct in 135 patients (73%) (p < 0.00001). If this improvement in management were extrapolated to all hospital patients in the United Kingdom, approximately 1400 strokes/year could be avoided. Despite broad consensus in recent publications, antithrombotic management of atrial fibrillation remains imperfect, with many patients exposed to unnecessarily high risk of stroke.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McNulty et al. (2000) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=370). Extensive education programme on stroke prevention vs. Initial audit (before education programme) was evaluated on Correct antithrombotic management (p=< 0.00001). An extensive education programme on stroke prevention increased the proportion of atrial fibrillation patients receiving correct antithrombotic management from 48% to 73% (p < 0.00001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: