Incidence of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and oral anticoagulant prescribing in England, 2009 to 2019: A cohort study.

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
PLoS Medicine Pub Date : 2022-06-07 eCollection Date: 2022-06-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004003
Alyaa M Ajabnoor, Salwa S Zghebi, Rosa Parisi, Darren M Ashcroft, Martin K Rutter, Tim Doran, Matthew J Carr, Mamas A Mamas, Evangelos Kontopantelis
{"title":"Incidence of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and oral anticoagulant prescribing in England, 2009 to 2019: A cohort study.","authors":"Alyaa M Ajabnoor, Salwa S Zghebi, Rosa Parisi, Darren M Ashcroft, Martin K Rutter, Tim Doran, Matthew J Carr, Mamas A Mamas, Evangelos Kontopantelis","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important risk factor for ischaemic stroke, and AF incidence is expected to increase. Guidelines recommend using oral anticoagulants (OACs) to prevent the development of stroke. However, studies have reported the frequent underuse of OACs in AF patients. The objective of this study is to describe nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) incidence in England and assess the clinical and socioeconomic factors associated with the underprescribing of OACs.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) database to identify patients with NVAF aged ≥18 years and registered in English general practices between 2009 and 2019. Annual incidence rate of NVAF by age, deprivation quintile, and region was estimated. OAC prescribing status was explored for patients at risk for stroke and classified into the following: OAC, aspirin only, or no treatment. We used a multivariable multinomial logistic regression model to estimate relative risk ratios (RRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the factors associated with OAC or aspirin-only prescribing compared to no treatment in patients with NVAF who are recommended to take OAC. The multivariable regression was adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, socioeconomic status, baseline treatment, frailty, bleeding risk factors, and takes into account clustering by general practice. Between 2009 and 2019, 12,517,191 patients met the criteria for being at risk of developing NVAF. After a median follow-up of 4.6 years, 192,265 patients had an incident NVAF contributing a total of 647,876 person-years (PYR) of follow-up. The overall age-adjusted incidence of NVAF per 10,000 PYR increased from 20.8 (95% CI: 20.4; 21.1) in 2009 to 25.5 (25.1; 25.9) in 2019. Higher incidence rates were observed for older ages and males. Among NVAF patients eligible for anticoagulation, OAC prescribing rose from 59.8% (95% CI: 59.0; 60.6) in 2009 to 83.2% (95% CI: 83.0; 83.4) in 2019. Several conditions were associated with lower risk of OAC prescribing: dementia [RRR 0.52 (0.47; 0.59)], liver disease 0.58 (0.50; 0.67), malignancy 0.74 (0.72; 0.77), and history of falls 0.82 (0.78; 0.85). Compared to white ethnicity, patients from black and other ethnic minorities were less likely to receive OAC; 0.78 (0.65; 0.94) and 0.76 (0.64; 0.91), respectively. Patients living in the most deprived areas were less likely to receive OAC 0.85 (0.79; 0.91) than patients living in the least deprived areas. Practices located in the East of England were associated with higher risk of prescribing aspirin only over no treatment than practices in London (RRR 1.22; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.45). The main limitation of this study is that these findings depends on accurate recording of conditions by health professionals and the inevitable residual confounding due to lack of data on certain factors that could be associated with under-prescribing of OACs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The incidence of NVAF increased between 2009 and 2015, before plateauing. Underprescribing of OACs in NVAF is associated with a range of comorbidities, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors, demonstrating the need for initiatives to reduce inequalities in the care for AF patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":20368,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9173622/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004003","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important risk factor for ischaemic stroke, and AF incidence is expected to increase. Guidelines recommend using oral anticoagulants (OACs) to prevent the development of stroke. However, studies have reported the frequent underuse of OACs in AF patients. The objective of this study is to describe nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) incidence in England and assess the clinical and socioeconomic factors associated with the underprescribing of OACs.

Methods and findings: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) database to identify patients with NVAF aged ≥18 years and registered in English general practices between 2009 and 2019. Annual incidence rate of NVAF by age, deprivation quintile, and region was estimated. OAC prescribing status was explored for patients at risk for stroke and classified into the following: OAC, aspirin only, or no treatment. We used a multivariable multinomial logistic regression model to estimate relative risk ratios (RRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the factors associated with OAC or aspirin-only prescribing compared to no treatment in patients with NVAF who are recommended to take OAC. The multivariable regression was adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, socioeconomic status, baseline treatment, frailty, bleeding risk factors, and takes into account clustering by general practice. Between 2009 and 2019, 12,517,191 patients met the criteria for being at risk of developing NVAF. After a median follow-up of 4.6 years, 192,265 patients had an incident NVAF contributing a total of 647,876 person-years (PYR) of follow-up. The overall age-adjusted incidence of NVAF per 10,000 PYR increased from 20.8 (95% CI: 20.4; 21.1) in 2009 to 25.5 (25.1; 25.9) in 2019. Higher incidence rates were observed for older ages and males. Among NVAF patients eligible for anticoagulation, OAC prescribing rose from 59.8% (95% CI: 59.0; 60.6) in 2009 to 83.2% (95% CI: 83.0; 83.4) in 2019. Several conditions were associated with lower risk of OAC prescribing: dementia [RRR 0.52 (0.47; 0.59)], liver disease 0.58 (0.50; 0.67), malignancy 0.74 (0.72; 0.77), and history of falls 0.82 (0.78; 0.85). Compared to white ethnicity, patients from black and other ethnic minorities were less likely to receive OAC; 0.78 (0.65; 0.94) and 0.76 (0.64; 0.91), respectively. Patients living in the most deprived areas were less likely to receive OAC 0.85 (0.79; 0.91) than patients living in the least deprived areas. Practices located in the East of England were associated with higher risk of prescribing aspirin only over no treatment than practices in London (RRR 1.22; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.45). The main limitation of this study is that these findings depends on accurate recording of conditions by health professionals and the inevitable residual confounding due to lack of data on certain factors that could be associated with under-prescribing of OACs.

Conclusions: The incidence of NVAF increased between 2009 and 2015, before plateauing. Underprescribing of OACs in NVAF is associated with a range of comorbidities, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors, demonstrating the need for initiatives to reduce inequalities in the care for AF patients.

2009年至2019年英国非瓣膜性房颤发病率和口服抗凝药物处方:一项队列研究
背景房颤(AF)是缺血性脑卒中的重要危险因素,其发病率预计会增加。指南建议使用口服抗凝剂(OACs)来预防中风的发生。然而,研究报道了房颤患者经常使用OACs的不足。本研究的目的是描述英国非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)的发病率,并评估与OACs处方不足相关的临床和社会经济因素。方法和结果我们使用英国临床实践研究数据链(CPRD)数据库进行了一项基于人群的回顾性队列研究,以确定2009年至2019年期间在英国全科医院登记的年龄≥18岁的非瓣瓣性房颤患者。按年龄、剥夺五分位数和地区估计非瓣膜性房颤的年发病率。对卒中风险患者的OAC处方状况进行了探讨,并将其分为:OAC、仅阿司匹林或不治疗。我们使用多变量多项逻辑回归模型来估计与OAC或仅开具阿司匹林处方的非瓣瓣性房颤患者相比,不服用OAC的相关因素的相对风险比(RRRs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。多变量回归根据年龄、性别、合并症、社会经济地位、基线治疗、虚弱、出血危险因素进行了调整,并考虑了一般做法的聚类。在2009年至2019年期间,有12517,191名患者符合发生非瓣瓣性房颤的风险标准。中位随访4.6年后,192265例患者发生非瓣膜性房颤,随访总时间为647,876人年(PYR)。每10,000名PYR患者中经年龄调整的非瓣膜性房颤总发生率从20.8增加(95% CI: 20.4;21.1)至25.5 (25.1;25.9) 2019年。老年人和男性的发病率较高。在符合抗凝条件的非瓣膜性房颤患者中,OAC处方从59.8%上升(95% CI: 59.0;60.6)至83.2% (95% CI: 83.0;83.4)。有几种情况与较低的OAC处方风险相关:痴呆[RRR 0.52 (0.47;0.59)],肝病0.58 (0.50;恶性0.74 (0.72;0.77),跌倒史0.82 (0.78;0.85)。与白人相比,黑人和其他少数民族患者接受OAC的可能性较小;0.78 (0.65;0.94)和0.76 (0.64;分别为0.91)。生活在最贫困地区的患者接受OAC的可能性较低,0.85 (0.79;0.91),高于生活在最贫困地区的患者。位于英格兰东部的做法与伦敦的做法相比,只开阿司匹林处方的风险更高(RRR 1.22;95% CI 1.02 ~ 1.45)。本研究的主要局限性在于,这些发现取决于卫生专业人员对病情的准确记录,以及由于缺乏可能与oac处方不足有关的某些因素的数据而不可避免地存在残留混淆。结论2009 - 2015年间,非瓣膜性房颤的发病率呈上升趋势。非瓣房性房颤的oac处方不足与一系列合并症、种族和社会经济因素有关,这表明需要采取措施减少房颤患者护理中的不平等现象。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
21.60
自引率
0.60%
发文量
227
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: PLOS Medicine aims to be a leading platform for research and analysis on the global health challenges faced by humanity. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedicine, the environment, society, and politics, that affect the well-being of individuals worldwide. It particularly highlights studies that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or our understanding of disease mechanisms, with the ultimate goal of improving health outcomes in diverse settings. Unwavering in its commitment to ethical standards, PLOS Medicine ensures integrity in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and transparently disclosing any conflicts of interest during the reporting, peer review, and publication processes. The journal promotes transparency by providing visibility into the review and publication procedures. It also encourages data sharing and the reuse of published work. Author rights are upheld, allowing them to retain copyright. Furthermore, PLOS Medicine strongly supports Open Access publishing, making research articles freely available to all without restrictions, facilitating widespread dissemination of knowledge. The journal does not endorse drug or medical device advertising and refrains from exclusive sales of reprints to avoid conflicts of interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信