Anticoagulants, Atrial Fibrillation, Prescribing Practices
Conditions
Brief summary
The SUPPORT-AF study aims to improve rates of anticoagulation (AC) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients by developing and delivering supportive tools and educational materials to providers treating patients with AF. The investigators hypothesize that AC percentage will increase among providers receiving tools and educational content.
Detailed description
Nearly 1 million patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who meet guideline criteria for anticoagulation (AC) are being left untreated, often due to providers over-estimating risks of bleeding and falling and under-estimating risks of stroke. The objective of this project is to improve rates of adherence to AC guidelines by creating supportive and educational materials for cardiology as well as primary care providers to evaluate the risks and benefits of prescribing AC to patients with AF. The investigators will email providers individual auto-updating reports containing their AC prescription rate compared to their peers and compared to practice level AC prescription goal. This report will also contain a list of the provider's AF patients who are eligible to receive AC based on their CHA2DS2-VASc stroke risk score ≥ 2 and a list of eligible AF patients with upcoming appointments to focus providers on an actionable group of patients with whom they might review the use of AC. The investigators will also message providers through the EHR prior to an upcoming appointment with an eligible patient reminding them to discuss AC if they deem appropriate. In addition, the investigators will directly engage with providers through academic teledetailing to educate providers on AC and address misconceptions and barriers to initiating or resuming AC in AF patients.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALAnticoagulation (AC) Intervention--Academic Detailing
One hour online web-based academic detailing session to develop an anticoagulant (AC) learning plan.
BEHAVIORALAnticoagulation (AC) Intervention--Prescribing Practices
Education and support related to anticoagulant prescribing practices.
Sponsors
Bristol-Myers Squibb
University of Massachusetts, Worcester
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* University of Massachusetts providers caring for patients aged 18 years and older with ICD-10 diagnostic code consistent with AF or atrial flutter who had a visit with a primary care provider or * cardiovascular medicine specialist in the previous one year with the diagnosis of AF present as an active diagnosis in the electronic medical record (EHR).
Exclusion criteria
* University of Massachusetts providers who do not care for patients aged 18 years and older with ICD-10 diagnostic code consistent with AF or atrial flutter who had a visit with a primary care provider or * cardiovascular medicine specialist in the previous one year with the diagnosis of AF present as an active diagnosis in the EHR.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change to Provider prescription rates | Intervention to three months post intervention. | The first primary outcome measure is to determine the impact of the intervention on provider prescribing rates (increase, decrease, same) |
| Change to Individual patient Anticoagulation (AC) status | Intervention to three months post intervention. | The effect of the intervention on individual patient anti-coagulation status as demonstrated by random effects logistic regression models for post-intervention AC status (anticoagulated / not anticoagulated) as a function of pre-intervention AC status. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in provider confidence in applying evidence to balance stroke prevention with harm. | Intervention to three months post intervention. | The change in provide confidence as assessed by confidence questions included in the provider survey distributed with the AC Provider Profile. More specifically, the change is calculated with an average score for each item in the confidence survey, using a four-point scale based on four response choices - not confident through very confident. |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed