Relation of quality of anticoagulation control with different management systems among patients with atrial fibrillation: data from FANTASIIA Registry

Abstract

[Abstract] Background. Anticoagulation control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has a multidisciplinary approach although is usually managed by general practitioners (GP) or haematologists. The aim of our study was to assess the quality of anticoagulation control with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in relation to the responsible specialist in a “real‐world” AF population. Methods. We consecutively enrolled VKA anticoagulated patients included in the FANTASIIA Registry from 2013 to 2015. We analysed demographical, clinical characteristics and the quality of anticoagulation control according to the specialist responsible (ie GPs or haematologists). Results. Data on 1584 patients were included (42.5% females, mean age 74.0 ± 9.4 years): 977 (61.7%) patients were controlled by GPs and 607 (38.3%) by haematologists. Patients managed by GPs had higher previous heart disease (53.2% vs 43.3%, P < .001), heart failure (32.9% vs 26.5%, P < .008) and dilated cardiomyopathy (15.2% vs 8.7%, P < .001) with better renal function (69.3 ± 24.7 vs 63.1 ± 21.4 mL/min, P < .001) compared to patients managed by haematologists. There was no difference between groups in the type of AF, CHA2DS2‐VASc or HAS‐BLED scores, but patients with electrical cardioversion were more prevalent in GP group. The overall mean time in therapeutic range (TTR) assessed by Rosendaal method was 61.5 ± 24.9%; 52.6% of patients had TTR<65% and 60% of patients had TTR<70%. TTR was significantly lower in patients controlled by haematologists than by GPs (63 ± 24.4 vs 59.2 ± 25.6, P < .005). Conclusions. About 60% of AF patients anticoagulated with VKAs had poor anticoagulation control (ie TTR<70%), and their management was only slightly better than when it is managed by general practitioners.