Management of Adults with Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation with and without CKD.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is highly prevalent in CKD and is associated with worse cardiovascular and kidney outcomes. Limited data exist on use of AF pharmacotherapies and AF-related procedures by CKD status. We examined a large "real-world" contemporary population with incident AF to study the association of CKD with management of AF. METHODS: We identified patients with newly diagnosed AF between 2010 and 2017 from two large, integrated health care delivery systems. eGFR (≥60, 45-59, 30-44, 15-29, <15 ml/min per 1.73 m2) was calculated from a minimum of two ambulatory serum creatinine measures separated by ≥90 days. AF medications and procedures were identified from electronic health records. We performed multivariable Fine-Gray subdistribution hazards regression to test the association of CKD severity with receipt of targeted AF therapies. RESULTS: Among 115,564 patients with incident AF, 34% had baseline CKD. In multivariable models, compared with those with eGFR >60 ml/min per 1.73 m2, patients with eGFR 30-44 (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91; 95% CI, 0.99 to 0.93), 15-29 (aHR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.82), and <15 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (aHR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.58-0.70) had lower use of any AF therapy. Patients with eGFR 15-29 ml/min per 1.73 m2 had lower adjusted use of rate control agents (aHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.67), warfarin (aHR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.94), and DOACs (aHR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.27) compared with patients with eGFR >60 ml/min per 1.73 m2. These associations were even stronger for eGFR <15 ml/min per 1.73 m2. There was also a graded association between CKD severity and receipt of AF-related procedures (vs eGFR >60 ml/min per 1.73 m2): eGFR 30-44 ml/min per 1.73 (aHR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.87), eGFR 15-29 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (aHR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.88), and eGFR <15 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (aHR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: In adults with newly diagnosed AF, CKD severity was associated with lower receipt of rate control agents, anticoagulation, and AF procedures. Additional data on efficacy and safety of AF therapies in CKD populations are needed to inform management strategies.

Comparative Effectiveness of Postdischarge Smoking Cessation Interventions for Hospital Patients: The Helping HAND 4 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Smoking cessation interventions for hospitalized patients must continue after discharge to improve long-term tobacco abstinence. How health systems can best deliver postdischarge tobacco treatment is uncertain. Objective: To determine if health system-based tobacco cessation treatment after hospital discharge produces more long-term tobacco abstinence than referral to a community-based quitline. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted September 2018 to November 2020 in 3 hospitals in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. Cigarette smokers admitted to a study hospital who received brief in-hospital tobacco treatment and wanted to quit smoking were recruited for participation and randomized for postdischarge treatment to health system-based Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) or electronic referral to a community-based quitline (QL). Both multicomponent interventions offered smoking cessation counseling and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for up to 3 months. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2021, to April 25, 2022. Interventions: TTCM provided 8 weeks of NRT at discharge and 7 automated calls with a hospital-based counselor call-back option. The QL intervention sent referrals from the hospital electronic health record to the state quitline, which offered 5 counseling calls and an NRT sample. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was biochemically verified past 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6 months. Self-reported point-prevalence and continuous tobacco abstinence and tobacco treatment utilization were assessed 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge. Results: A total of 1409 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.7 [12.6] years; 784 [55.6%] women; mean [SD] 16.4 [10.6] cigarettes/day) were recruited, including 706 randomized to TTCM and 703 randomized to QL. Participants were comparable at baseline, including 216 Black participants (15.3%), 82 Hispanic participants (5.8%), and 1089 White participants (77.3%). At 1 and 3 months after discharge, more TTCM participants than QL participants used cessation counseling (1 month: 245 participants [34.7%] vs 154 participants [21.9%]; 3 months: 248 participants [35.1%] vs 123 participants [17.5%]; P < .001) and pharmacotherapy (1 month: 455 participants [64.4%] vs 324 participants [46.1%]; 3 months: 367 participants [52.0%] vs 264 participants [37.6%]; P < .001). More TTCM than QL participants reported continuous abstinence for 3 months (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.06-1.58) and point-prevalence abstinence at 1 month (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08-1.35) and 3 months (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.37) but not at 6 months (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.29). The primary outcome, biochemically verified point-prevalence abstinence at 6 months, was not statistically significantly different between groups (19.9% vs 16.9%; RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.92-1.50). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, biochemically verified tobacco abstinence rates were not significantly different between groups at the 6-month follow-up. However, the health system-based model was superior to the community-based quitline model throughout the 3 months of active treatment. A longer duration of postdischarge treatment may sustain the superiority of the health system-based model. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03603496.

ReducinG stroke by screening for UndiAgnosed atRial fibrillation in elderly inDividuals (GUARD-AF): Rationale and design of the GUARD-AF randomized trial of screening for atrial fibrillation with a 14-day patch-based continuous ECG monitor.

BACKGROUND: Screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) is attractive because AF independently raises the risk of ischemic stroke, this risk is largely reversible by long-term oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC), and many patients with AF remain undiagnosed and untreated. Recent trials of one-time brief screening for AF have not produced a significant increase in the proportion of patients diagnosed with AF. Trials of longer-term screening have demonstrated an increase in AF diagnoses, primarily paroxysmal AF. To date, however, no trials have demonstrated that screening for AF results in lower rates of stroke. Clinical practice guidelines conflict in their level of support for screening for AF. METHODS: The GUARD-AF individually randomized trial is designed to test whether screening for AF in individuals age 70 years or greater using a 2-week single-lead electrocardiographic patch monitor can identify patients with undiagnosed AF and lead to treatment with OAC, resulting in a reduced rate of stroke in the screened population. The trial's efficacy end point is hospitalization for stroke (either ischemic or hemorrhagic) and the trial's safety end point is hospitalization for a bleeding event. End points will be ascertained via Medicare claims or electronic health records at 2.5 years after study start. Enrollment is based in primary care practices and the OAC decision for screen-detected cases is left to the patient and their physician. The initial planned target sample size was 52,000, with 26,000 allocated to either screening or to usual care. RESULTS: Trial enrollment was severely hampered by the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and stopped at a total enrollment of 11,931 participants. Of 5,965 randomized to the screening arm, 5,713 patients (96%) returned monitors with analyzable results. Incidence of screen-detected and clinically detected AF and associated stroke and bleeding outcomes will be ascertained. CONCLUSIONS: GUARD-AF is the largest AF screening randomized trial using a longer-term patch-based continuous electrocardiographic monitor. The results will contribute important information on the yield of patch-based AF screening, the "burden" of AF detected (percent time in AF, longest episode), and physicians' OAC decisions as a function of AF burden. GUARD-AF's stroke and bleed results will contribute to pooled trial analyses of AF screening, thereby informing future studies and guidelines.

Cigarette Smoking and Risk Perceptions During the COVID-19 Pandemic Reported by Recently Hospitalized Participants in a Smoking Cessation Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cigarette smoking is a risk factor for severe COVID-19 disease. Understanding smokers' responses to the pandemic will help assess its public health impact and inform future public health and provider messages to smokers. OBJECTIVE: To assess risk perceptions and change in tobacco use among current and former smokers during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey conducted in May-July 2020 (55% response rate) PARTICIPANTS: 694 current and former daily smokers (mean age 53, 40% male, 78% white) who had been hospitalized pre-COVID-19 and enrolled into a smoking cessation clinical trial at hospitals in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. MAIN MEASURES: Perceived risk of COVID-19 due to tobacco use; changes in tobacco consumption and interest in quitting tobacco use; self-reported quitting and relapse since January 2020. KEY RESULTS: 68% (95% CI, 65-72%) of respondents believed that smoking increases the risk of contracting COVID-19 or having a more severe case. In adjusted analyses, perceived risk was higher in Massachusetts where COVID-19 had already surged than in Pennsylvania and Tennessee which were pre-surge during survey administration (AOR 1.56, 95% CI, 1.07-2.28). Higher perceived COVID-19 risk was associated with increased interest in quitting smoking (AOR 1.72, 95% CI 1.01-2.92). During the pandemic, 32% (95% CI, 27-37%) of smokers increased, 37% (95% CI, 33-42%) decreased, and 31% (95% CI, 26-35%) did not change their cigarette consumption. Increased smoking was associated with higher perceived stress (AOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.16-1.91). Overall, 11% (95% CI, 8-14%) of respondents who smoked in January 2020 (pre-COVID-19) had quit smoking at survey (mean, 6 months later) while 28% (95% CI, 22-34%) of former smokers relapsed. Higher perceived COVID-19 risk was associated with higher odds of quitting and lower odds of relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Most smokers believed that smoking increased COVID-19 risk. Smokers' responses to the pandemic varied, with increased smoking related to stress and increased quitting associated with perceived COVID-19 vulnerability.