European Primary Care Cardiovascular Society (EPCCS) consensus guidance on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF) in primary care

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation affects 1-2% of the general population and 10% of those over 75, and is responsible for around a quarter of all strokes. These strokes are largely preventable by the use of anticoagulation therapy, although many eligible patients are not treated. Recent large clinical trials have added to the evidence base on stroke prevention and international clinical guidelines have been updated. DESIGN: Consensus practical recommendations from primary care physicians with an interest in vascular disease and vascular specialists. METHODS: A focussed all-day meeting, with presentation of summary evidence under each section of this guidance and review of European guidelines on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, was used to generate a draft document, which then underwent three cycles of revision and debate before all panel members agreed with the consensus statements. RESULTS: Six areas were identified that included how to identify patients with atrial fibrillation, how to determine their stroke risk and whether to recommend modification of this risk, and what management options are available, with practical recommendations on maximising benefit and minimising risk if anticoagulation is recommended and the reasons why antiplatelet therapy is no longer recommended. The summary evidence is presented for each area and simple summary recommendations are highlighted, with areas of remaining uncertainty listed. CONCLUSIONS: Atrial fibrillation-related stroke is a major public health priority for most health systems. This practical guidance can assist generalist community physicians to translate the large evidence base for this cause of preventable stroke and implement this at a local level

Stroke prevention and atrial fibrillation: reasons leading to an inappropriate management. Main results of the SAFE II study

Aims: The aim of the Stroke and Atrial Fibrillation Ensemble (SAFE) II study was to identify the reasons underlying the under-utilization of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Methods: We investigated from all available sources the reasons why patients hospitalized for a stroke, who had a previously known NVAF, were not receiving OAC beforehand. We interviewed general practitioners (GPs) and cardiologists with a structured questionnaire, to identify the reasons for their therapeutic choice. Results: Of 370 patients, 257 were theoretically eligible for OAC according to guidelines and the presence of contra-indications, but only 82 (22.2%) of them had actually received OAC before. We found that factors independently associated with the prescription of OAC were being followed-up by a cardiologist and having a younger GP. The leading reason evoked by GPs or cardiologists to explain why patients were not treated with OAC was the presence of a 'potential contra-indication', which was often inappropriate, followed by 'there was no indication', 'low compliance' and 'fear of bleeding'. Conclusions: An important reason for not prescribing OAC was the lack of knowledge about trials and guidelines. Medical education about OAC in NVAF should therefore be improved