Jaeger, Thomas M.

Objectives: To assess clinicians’ prescribing practices for anticoagulation in older adults with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF/F) and determine factors common among those without anticoagulation. Methods: We performed a community-based retrospective cohort study of adults aged 65 years and older with a history of nonvalvular AF/F to determine the rate of oral anticoagulation utilization. We also assessed for associations between anticoagulation use and comorbid conditions and common geriatric syndromes. Results: A total of 3832 patients with a diagnosis of nonvalvular AF/F were included (mean [SD] age, 79.9 [8.4] years), 2693 (70.3%) of whom were receiving anticoagulation (51.7%, a vitamin K antagonist; 48.1%, a direct-acting oral anticoagulant). Patients with higher Elderly Risk Assessment index (ERA) scores, a surrogate for health vulnerability, received anticoagulation less often than patients with lower scores. The percentage of patients with a history of falling was higher among those who did not receive anticoagulation than among those who did (44.4% vs 32.8%; P < .001). Similarly, a diagnosis of dementia was more common in the no-anticoagulation group than the anticoagulation group (18.5% vs 12.7%; P < .001). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of older adults with AF/F do not receive anticoagulation. Those without anticoagulation had higher risk of health deterioration based on higher ERA scores and had a higher incidence of dementia and fall history. This suggests that the presence of geriatric syndromes may influence the decision to withhold anticoagulation.

Background Guidelines promote shared decision‐making (SDM) for anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation. We recently showed that adding a within‐encounter SDM tool to usual care (UC) increases patient involvement in decision‐making and clinician satisfaction, without affecting encounter length. We aimed to estimate the extent to which use of an SDM tool changed adherence to the decided care plan and clinical safety end points. Methods and Results We conducted a multicenter, encounter‐level, randomized trial assessing the efficacy of UC with versus without an SDM conversation tool for use during the clinical encounter (Anticoagulation Choice) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation considering starting or reviewing anticoagulation treatment. We conducted a chart and pharmacy review, blinded to randomization status, at 10 months after enrollment to assess primary adherence (proportion of patients who were prescribed an anticoagulant who filled their first prescription) and secondary adherence (estimated using the proportion of days for which treatment was supplied and filled for direct oral anticoagulant, and as time in therapeutic range for warfarin). We also noted any strokes, transient ischemic attacks, major bleeding, or deaths as safety end points. We enrolled 922 evaluable patient encounters (Anticoagulation Choice=463, and UC=459), of which 814 (88%) had pharmacy and clinical follow‐up. We found no differences between arms in either primary adherence (78% of patients in the SDM arm filled their first prescription versus 81% in UC arm) or secondary adherence to anticoagulation (percentage days covered of the direct oral anticoagulant was 74.1% in SDM versus 71.6% in UC; time in therapeutic range for warfarin was 66.6% in SDM versus 64.4% in UC). Safety outcomes, mostly bleeds, occurred in 13% of participants in the SDM arm and 14% in the UC arm. Conclusions In this large, randomized trial comparing UC with a tool to promote SDM against UC alone, we found no significant differences between arms in primary or secondary adherence to anticoagulation or in clinical safety outcomes. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT02905032.

Many primary care providers feel uncomfortable discussing end-of-life care. The aim of this intervention was to assess internal medicine residents’ advance care planning (ACP) practices and improve residents’ ACP confidence. Residents participated in a facilitated ACP quality improvement workshop, which included an interactive presentation and chart audit of their own patients. Pre- and postintervention surveys assessed resident ACP-related confidence. Only 24% of the audited patients had an advance directive (AD), and 28% of the ACP-documentation was of no clinical utility. Terminally ill patients (odds ratio 2.8, P < .001) were more likely to have an AD. Patients requiring an interpreter were less likely to have participated in ACP. Residents reported significantly improved confidence with ACP and identified important training gaps. Future studies examining the impact on ACP quality are needed.