Do physicians correctly calculate thromboembolic risk scores?: a comparison of concordance between manual and computer‐based calculation of CHADS2 and CHA2DS2‐VASc scores

Abstract

[Abstract] BACKGROUND: Clinical risk scores, CHADS2 and CHA2 DS2 -VASc scores, are the established tools for assessing stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). AIM: The aim of this study is to assess concordance between manual and computer-based calculation of CHADS2 and CHA2 DS2 -VASc scores, as well as to analyse the patient categories using CHADS2 and the potential improvement on stroke risk stratification with CHA2 DS2 -VASc score. METHODS: We linked data from Atrial Fibrillation Spanish registry FANTASIIA. Between June 2013 and March 2014, 1318 consecutive outpatients were recruited. We explore the concordance between manual scoring and computer-based calculation. We compare the distribution of embolic risk of patients using both CHADS2 and CHA2 DS2 -VASc scores RESULTS: The mean age was 73.8 ± 9.4 years, and 758 (57.5%) were male. For CHADS2 score, concordance between manual scoring and computer-based calculation was 92.5%, whereas for CHA2 DS2 -VASc score was 96.4%. In CHADS2 score, 6.37% of patients with AF changed indication on antithrombotic therapy (3.49% of patients with no treatment changed to need antithrombotic treatment and 2.88% of patients otherwise). Using CHA2 DS2 -VASc score, only 0.45% of patients with AF needed to change in the recommendation of antithrombotic therapy. CONCLUSION: We have found a strong concordance between manual and computer-based score calculation of both CHADS2 and CHA2 DS2 -VASc risk scores with minimal changes in anticoagulation recommendations. The use of CHA2 DS2 -VASc score significantly improves classification of AF patients at low and intermediate risk of stroke into higher grade of thromboembolic score. Moreover, CHA2 DS2 -VASc score could identify 'truly low risk' patients compared with CHADS2 score.