Cost of an emerging epidemic: an economic analysis of atrial fibrillation in the UK

Objective: To evaluate the cost of atrial fibrillation (AF) to health and social services in the UK in 1995 and, based on epidemiological trends, to project this estimate to 2000. Design, setting, and main outcome measures: Contemporary estimates of health care activity related to AF were applied to the whole population of the UK on an age and sex specific basis for the year 1995. The activities considered ( and costs calculated) were hospital admissions, outpatient consultations, general practice consultations, and drug treatment ( including the cost of monitoring anticoagulant treatment). By adjusting for the progressive aging of the British population and related increases in hospital admissions, the cost of AF was also projected to the year 2000. Results: There were 534 000 people with AF in the UK during 1995. The direct'' cost of health care for these patients was pound 244 million (similar toE350 million) or 0.62% of total National Health Service ( NHS) expenditure. Hospitalisations and drug prescriptions accounted for 50% and 20% of this expenditure, respectively. Long term nursing home care after hospital admission cost an additional pound46.4 million (similar toE66 million). The direct cost of AF rose to pound459 million (similar toE655 million) in 2000, equivalent to 0.97% of total NHS expenditure based on 1995 figures. Nursing home costs rose to pound111 million (similar toE160 million). Conclusions: AF is an extremely costly public health problem.

Use of real-time three-dimensional echocardiography to measure left atrial volume: Comparison with other echocardiographic techniques

Objectives: Left atrial (LA) volume (LAV) is a prognostically important biomarker for diastolic dysfunction, but its reproducibility on repeated testing is not well defined. LA assessment with 3-dimensional. (3D) echocardiography (3DE) has been validated against magnetic resonance imaging, and we sought to assess whether this was superior to existing measurements for sequential echocardiographic follow-up. Methods: Patients (n = 100; 81 men; age 56 +/- 14 years) presenting for LA evaluation were studied with M-mode (MM) echocardiography, 2-dimensional (2D) echocardiography, and 3DE. Test-retest variation was performed by a complete restudy by a separate sonographer within 1 hour without alteration of hemodynamics or therapy. In all, 20 patients were studied for interobserver and intraobserver variation. LAVs were calculated by using M-mode diameter and planimetered atrial area in the apical. 4-chamber view to calculate an assumed sphere, as were prolate ellipsoid, Simpson's biplane, and biplane area-length methods. All were compared with 3DE. Results: The average LAV was 72 +/- 27 mL by 3DE. There was significant underestimation of LAV by M-mode (35 +/- 20 mL, r = 0.66, P < .01). The 3DE and various 2D echocardiographic techniques were well correlated: LA planimetry (85 +/- 38 mL, r = 0.77, P < .01), prolate ellipsoid (73 +/- 36 mL, r = 0.73, P = .04), area-length (64 +/- 30 mL, r = 0.74, P < .01), and Simpson's biplane (69 +/- 31 mL, r = 0.78, P = .06). Test-retest variation for 3DE was most favorable (r = 0.98, P < .01), with the prolate ellipsoid method showing most variation. Interobserver agreement between measurements was best for 3DE (r = 0.99, P < .01), with M-mode the worst (r = 0.89, P < .01). Intraobserver results were similar to interobserver, the best correlation for 3DE (r = 0.99, P < .01), with LA planimetry the worst (r = 0.91, P < .01). Conclusions. The 2D measurements correlate closely with 3DE. Follow-up assessment in daily practice appears feasible and reliable with both 2D and 3D approaches.

Is pulse palpation helpful in detecting atrial fibrillation? A systematic review

Background Atrial fibrillation in the elderly is common and potentially life threatening. The classical sign of atrial fibrillation is an irregularly irregular pulse. Objective The objective of this research was to determine the accuracy of pulse palpation to detect atrial fibrillation. Methods We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the reference lists of review articles for studies that compared pulse palpation with the electrocardiogram (ECG) diagnosis of atrial fibrillation. Two reviewers independently assessed the search results to determine the eligibility of studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the studies. Results We identified 3 studies (2385 patients) that compared pulse palpation with ECG. The estimated sensitivity of pulse palpation ranged from 91% to 100%, while specificity ranged from 70% to 77%. Pooled sensitivity was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84%-97%) and pooled specificity was 72% (95% CI 69%-75%). The pooled positive likelihood ratio was 3.39, while the pooled negative likelihood ratio was 0.10. Conclusions Pulse palpation has a high sensitivity but relatively low specificity for atrial fibrillation. It is therefore useful for ruling out atrial fibrillation. It may also be a useful screen to apply opportunistically for previously undetected atrial fibrillation. Assuming a prevalence of 3% for undetected atrial fibrillation in patients older than 65 years, and given the test's sensitivity and specificity, opportunistic pulse palpation in this age group would detect an irregular pulse in 30% of screened patients, requiring further testing with ECG. Among screened patients, 0.2% would have atrial fibrillation undetected with pulse palpation.

Prediction of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

We present a novel method for prediction of the onset of a spontaneous (paroxysmal) atrial fibrilation episode by representing the electrocardiograph (ECG) output as two time series corresponding to the interbeat intervals and the lengths of the atrial component of the ECG. We will then show how different entropy measures can be calulated from both of these series and then combined in a neural network trained using the Bayesian evidence procedure to form and effective predictive classifier.

TRial of an Educational intervention on patients' knowledge of Atrial fibrillation and anticoagulant therapy, INR control, and outcome of Treatment with warfarin (TREAT)

Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with a high risk of stroke are recommended anticoagulation with warfarin. However, the benefit of warfarin is dependent upon time spent within the target therapeutic range (TTR) of their international normalised ratio (INR) (2.0 to 3.0). AF patients possess limited knowledge of their disease and warfarin treatment and this can impact on INR control. Education can improve patients' understanding of warfarin therapy and factors which affect INR control. Methods/Design Randomised controlled trial of an intensive educational intervention will consist of group sessions (between 2-8 patients) containing standardised information about the risks and benefits associated with OAC therapy, lifestyle interactions and the importance of monitoring and control of their International Normalised Ratio (INR). Information will be presented within an 'expert-patient' focussed DVD, revised educational booklet and patient worksheets. 200 warfarin-naïve patients who are eligible for warfarin will be randomised to either the intervention or usual care groups. All patients must have ECG-documented AF and be eligible for warfarin (according to the NICE AF guidelines). Exclusion criteria include: aged < 18 years old, contraindication(s) to warfarin, history of warfarin USE, valvular heart disease, cognitive impairment, are unable to speak/read English and disease likely to cause death within 12 months. Primary endpoint is time spent in TTR. Secondary endpoints include measures of quality of life (AF-QoL-18), anxiety and depression (HADS), knowledge of AF and anticoagulation, beliefs about medication (BMQ) and illness representations (IPQ-R). Clinical outcomes, including bleeding, stroke and interruption to anticoagulation will be recorded. All outcome measures will be assessed at baseline and 1, 2, 6 and 12 months post-intervention. Discussion More data is needed on the clinical benefit of educational intervention with AF patients receiving warfarin. Trial registration ISRCTN93952605