American Heart Journal
Volume 154, Issue 5 , Pages 893-898, November 2007

Outpatient use of anticoagulants, rate-controlling drugs, and antiarrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation

  • Nancy M. Allen LaPointe, PharmD

      Affiliations

    • Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Nancy M. Allen LaPointe, PharmD, Duke Clinical Research Institute, P.O. Box 17969, Durham, NC 27715.
  • ,
  • Laura Governale, PharmD, MBA

      Affiliations

    • US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD
  • ,
  • Jerry Watkins, MS

      Affiliations

    • Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
  • ,
  • Jyotsna Mulgund, MS

      Affiliations

    • Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
  • ,
  • Kevin J. Anstrom, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC

Received 20 November 2006; accepted 22 June 2007. published online 20 August 2007.

Background

The first clinical practice guidelines for management of atrial fibrillation (AF) were published in 2001. We explored the use of anticoagulants, rate-controlling drugs, and antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with AF during the 4 years surrounding publication of these guidelines.

Methods

Mentions of warfarin, β-blockers, digoxin, diltiazem, verapamil, and all class I and class III antiarrhythmic drugs made by US office-based physicians during patient visits for AF between October 1999 and September 2003 were evaluated using the IMS Health National Disease and Therapeutic Index (Plymouth Meeting, PA). Medication use by patient age, sex, and physician specialty was explored. Trends in use during the study period were estimated.

Results

Warfarin was mentioned in an average of 37% of all AF-related visits across the observation period, with no statistically significant change over time. Digoxin was the most commonly mentioned rate-controlling drug in 23% of patient visits, followed by β-blockers in 11% and calcium-channel blockers in 8%. Over the study period, mentions of digoxin significantly decreased, and mentions of β-blockers significantly increased. Mentions of antiarrhythmic drugs were reported in an average of 12% of patient visits, with no significant change over the study period.

Conclusions

Observed trends in use of digoxin, β-blockers, and class Ia antiarrhythmic drugs were consistent with evidence-based recommendations. However, only approximately one third of patient visits for AF included mentions of warfarin, even among patients aged ≥60 years. These results indicate the need for continued education and interventions, especially regarding stroke prevention, in patients with AF.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 This research was supported in part by grant #U18HS10548 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, US Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD.

PII: S0002-8703(07)00534-0

doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2007.06.035

American Heart Journal
Volume 154, Issue 5 , Pages 893-898, November 2007