The aim of this pilot study is to determine the pattern of oral anticoagulant and antiplatelet use in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) in Irish general practice.

Worldwide, AF is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia in adults and poses a significant burden to patients, physicians and healthcare systems. There is a five-fold increased risk of stroke with AF, and AF-related strokes are associated with higher levels of both morbidity and mortality compared to other stroke subtypes. Thankfully, appropriate use of oral anticoagulation (OAC) for AF can reduce the risk of stroke by up to 64%. However, we know that patients are commonly undertreated with OAC, prescribed inappropriate doses of OAC and have prolonged use of an antiplatelet agent in addition to OAC without indication.

A descriptive, cross-sectional observational study was undertaken. Proportionate sampling was used across 11 practices from the Ireland East practice-based research network. The general practitioners completed a report form on each patient provided by the research team by undertaking a retrospective chart review.

Eleven practices participated with a total number of 1855 patients with AF. We received data on 153 patients.

The main findings from this pilot project are that:

1. 1. 11% of patients were undertreated with OAC

2. 2. 20 % of patients were on an incorrect non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant dose

3. 3. 28 patients (18%) were inappropriately prescribed combination antithrombotic therapy

Undertreatment and underdosing of OAC expose patients to higher risk of thromboembolic events, bleeding and all-cause mortality. Prolonged combination antithrombotic therapy is associated with serious increased risk of bleeding with no additional stroke protection. This pilot project highlights several gaps between guidelines and clinical practice. By identifying these areas, we hope to develop a targeted quality improvement intervention using the electronic health records in general practice to improve the care that those with AF receive.

Whereas the beneficial effect of antiplatelet therapy for recurrent stroke prevention has been well established, uncertainties remain regarding the optimal antithrombotic regimen for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis. We sought to explore the approaches of stroke physicians to antithrombotic management of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis.

We employed a qualitative descriptive methodology to explore the decision-making approaches and opinions of physicians regarding antithrombotic regimens for symptomatic carotid stenosis. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 22 stroke physicians (11 neurologists, 3 geriatricians, 5 interventional-neuroradiologists, and 3 neurosurgeons) from 16 centers on four continents to discuss symptomatic carotid stenosis management. We then conducted thematic analysis on the transcripts.

Important themes revealed from our analysis included limitations of existing clinical trial evidence, competing surgeon versus neurologist/internist preferences, and the choice of antiplatelet therapy while awaiting revascularization. There was a greater concern for adverse events while using multiple antiplatelet agents (e.g., dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)) in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy compared to carotid artery stenting. Regional variations included more frequent use of single antiplatelet agents among European participants. Areas of uncertainty included antithrombotic management if already on an antiplatelet agent, implications of nonstenotic features of carotid disease, the role of newer antiplatelet agents or anticoagulants, platelet aggregation testing, and timing of DAPT.

Our qualitative findings can help physicians critically examine the rationale underlying their own antithrombotic approaches to symptomatic carotid stenosis. Future clinical trials may wish to accommodate identified variations in practice patterns and areas of uncertainty to better inform clinical practice.