SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

AIM-AF: A Physician Survey in the United States and Europe.

Camm, AJ; Blomström-Lundqvist, C; Boriani, G; Goette, A; Kowey, PR; Merino, JL; Piccini, JP; Saksena, S; Reiffel, JA (2022) AIM-AF: A Physician Survey in the United States and Europe. J Am Heart Assoc, 11 (6). e023838. ISSN 2047-9980 https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.023838
SGUL Authors: Camm, Alan John

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Background Guideline recommendations are the accepted reference for selection of therapies for rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study was designed to understand physicians' treatment practices and adherence to guidelines. Methods and Results The AIM-AF (Antiarrhythmic Medication for Atrial Fibrillation) study was an online survey of clinical cardiologists and electrophysiologists that was conducted in the United States and Europe (N=629). Respondents actively treated ≥30 patients with AF who received drug therapy, and had received or were referred for ablation every 3 months. The survey comprised 96 questions on physician demographics, AF types, and treatment practices. Overall, 54% of respondents considered guidelines to be the most important nonpatient factor influencing treatment choice. Across most queried comorbidities, amiodarone was selected by 60% to 80% of respondents. Other nonadherent usage included sotalol by 21% in patients with renal impairment; dofetilide initiation (16%, United States only) outside of hospital; class Ic agents by 6% in coronary artery disease; and dronedarone by 8% in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Additionally, rhythm control strategies were frequently chosen in asymptomatic AF (antiarrhythmic drugs [AADs], 35%; ablation, 8%) and subclinical AF (AADs, 38%; ablation, 13%). Despite guideline algorithms emphasizing safety first, efficacy (48%) was selected as the most important consideration for AAD choice, followed by safety (34%). Conclusions Despite surveyed clinicians recognizing the importance of guidelines, nonadherence was frequently observed. While deviation may be reasonable in selected patients, in general, nonadherence has the potential to compromise patient safety. These findings highlight an underappreciation of the safe use of AADs, emphasizing the need for interventions to support optimal AAD selection.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Keywords: antiarrhythmic drug, atrial fibrillation, physician
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute (MCS)
Journal or Publication Title: J Am Heart Assoc
ISSN: 2047-9980
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
15 March 2022Published
4 March 2022Published Online
22 December 2021Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
PubMed ID: 35243874
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/114191
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.023838

Statistics

Item downloaded times since 17 Mar 2022.

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item