Abstract
Study objective: Although clinical guidelines recommend oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation patients at high risk of stroke, emergency physicians inconsistently prescribe it to patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. We interview emergency physicians to gain insight into themes influencing prescribing of oral anticoagulation for patients discharged from the ED with new-onset atrial fibrillation. Methods: From September 2015 to January 2017, we conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with a purposeful sampling of 18 ED attending physicians who had evaluated a patient with new-onset atrial fibrillation within the past 30 days. Interview prompts examined physicians’ attitudes toward prescription of oral anticoagulation therapy and current clinical guidelines. We used a constructivist grounded theory approach to analyze data and develop a theory on prescribing practices among emergency physicians. Results: Three broad domains emerged from our analyses. (1)Oral anticoagulation prescribing practice: underlying themes affecting oral anticoagulation prescribing from the ED included physician practice patterns, beliefs, and barriers (including experience, comfort, and insurance coverage), and patient factors (including comorbidities, bleeding risk, and social concerns). Ultimately, these themes indicated physician discomfort and a sense of futility in prescribing oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. (2)Guideline usage for oral anticoagulation prescribing: regardless of experience, most emergency physicians did not report using clinical guidelines when treating patients. (3)Recommendations for improved prescribing: physicians recommended the development of a validated, reliable, simple, accessible, and population-specific guideline that considers patient social factors. Conclusion: The decision to prescribe oral anticoagulation in the ED is complex. Improving guideline adherence will require a multifaceted approach inclusive of system-level improvements, physician education, and the development of ED-specific tools and guidelines.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Journal | Annals of emergency medicine |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jan 1 2019 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Emergency Medicine
Cite this
Stroke Prophylaxis for Atrial Fibrillation? To Prescribe or Not to Prescribe—A Qualitative Study on the Decisionmaking Process of Emergency Department Providers. / Kea, Bory; Alligood, Tahroma; Robinson, Cassandra; Livingston, Josephine; Sun, Benjamin.
In: Annals of emergency medicine, 01.01.2019.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Stroke Prophylaxis for Atrial Fibrillation? To Prescribe or Not to Prescribe—A Qualitative Study on the Decisionmaking Process of Emergency Department Providers
AU - Kea, Bory
AU - Alligood, Tahroma
AU - Robinson, Cassandra
AU - Livingston, Josephine
AU - Sun, Benjamin
PY - 2019/1/1
Y1 - 2019/1/1
N2 - Study objective: Although clinical guidelines recommend oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation patients at high risk of stroke, emergency physicians inconsistently prescribe it to patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. We interview emergency physicians to gain insight into themes influencing prescribing of oral anticoagulation for patients discharged from the ED with new-onset atrial fibrillation. Methods: From September 2015 to January 2017, we conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with a purposeful sampling of 18 ED attending physicians who had evaluated a patient with new-onset atrial fibrillation within the past 30 days. Interview prompts examined physicians’ attitudes toward prescription of oral anticoagulation therapy and current clinical guidelines. We used a constructivist grounded theory approach to analyze data and develop a theory on prescribing practices among emergency physicians. Results: Three broad domains emerged from our analyses. (1)Oral anticoagulation prescribing practice: underlying themes affecting oral anticoagulation prescribing from the ED included physician practice patterns, beliefs, and barriers (including experience, comfort, and insurance coverage), and patient factors (including comorbidities, bleeding risk, and social concerns). Ultimately, these themes indicated physician discomfort and a sense of futility in prescribing oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. (2)Guideline usage for oral anticoagulation prescribing: regardless of experience, most emergency physicians did not report using clinical guidelines when treating patients. (3)Recommendations for improved prescribing: physicians recommended the development of a validated, reliable, simple, accessible, and population-specific guideline that considers patient social factors. Conclusion: The decision to prescribe oral anticoagulation in the ED is complex. Improving guideline adherence will require a multifaceted approach inclusive of system-level improvements, physician education, and the development of ED-specific tools and guidelines.
AB - Study objective: Although clinical guidelines recommend oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation patients at high risk of stroke, emergency physicians inconsistently prescribe it to patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. We interview emergency physicians to gain insight into themes influencing prescribing of oral anticoagulation for patients discharged from the ED with new-onset atrial fibrillation. Methods: From September 2015 to January 2017, we conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with a purposeful sampling of 18 ED attending physicians who had evaluated a patient with new-onset atrial fibrillation within the past 30 days. Interview prompts examined physicians’ attitudes toward prescription of oral anticoagulation therapy and current clinical guidelines. We used a constructivist grounded theory approach to analyze data and develop a theory on prescribing practices among emergency physicians. Results: Three broad domains emerged from our analyses. (1)Oral anticoagulation prescribing practice: underlying themes affecting oral anticoagulation prescribing from the ED included physician practice patterns, beliefs, and barriers (including experience, comfort, and insurance coverage), and patient factors (including comorbidities, bleeding risk, and social concerns). Ultimately, these themes indicated physician discomfort and a sense of futility in prescribing oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. (2)Guideline usage for oral anticoagulation prescribing: regardless of experience, most emergency physicians did not report using clinical guidelines when treating patients. (3)Recommendations for improved prescribing: physicians recommended the development of a validated, reliable, simple, accessible, and population-specific guideline that considers patient social factors. Conclusion: The decision to prescribe oral anticoagulation in the ED is complex. Improving guideline adherence will require a multifaceted approach inclusive of system-level improvements, physician education, and the development of ED-specific tools and guidelines.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065227664&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065227664&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2019.03.026
DO - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2019.03.026
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85065227664
JO - Annals of Emergency Medicine
JF - Annals of Emergency Medicine
SN - 0196-0644
ER -