Preventing strokes in people with atrial fibrillation by improving ABC.

Nationally, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is improving but remains characterised by marked provider variation. Uncontrolled blood pressure and coronary artery disease further increase cardiovascular risk. Redbridge Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and local National Health Service (NHS) hospital trusts supported a programme to improve anticoagulation, blood pressure and cholesterol management; the ABC of AF improvement. The programme was delivered by a clinical pharmacist in 43 general practices, who used Active Patient Link (APL-AF) software to identify and electronically review the records of AF patients potentially suitable for anticoagulation. These patients were invited for a general practitioner (GP)-pharmacist consultation with initiation of anticoagulation where appropriate. Blood pressure and lipid treatment were also optimised. The university-based Clinical Effectiveness Group (CEG) provided software support using standard data entry templates from which the APL-AF software was enabled. This identified suitable patients (eg, on aspirin monotherapy, no treatment or inappropriate dual treatments) for clinical and treatment review. It also reported real-time overall practice performance. Additionally, GP education on direct oral anticoagulant initiation in general practices, use of software and performance reviews, took place for all practices in Redbridge. A weekly multidisciplinary team (MDT) video conference discussed complex patients with a cardiologist, haematologist, GP with specialist interest in cardiology, GP coordinator and clinical pharmacist. This enabled sharing of patient records between GPs and hospital specialists with improved communication and learning. Over 1 year 2016-2017, anticoagulation in eligible AF patients (CHA2DS2-VASc≥2) increased significantly by 6.3% from 77.0% to 83.3% (p<0.0001), in comparison to 2.8% average improvement in England. Exception reporting was also significantly reduced from 10.0% to 5.8%; a reduction of 4.2% in comparison to a reduction in England of 1.5%. Use of antiplatelet monotherapy was approximately halved, from 12.3% to 6.4%. These methods are being scaled locally in other London CCGs and are potentially scalable nationally, specifically targeting the poorer performing CCGs.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Strategies for People Undergoing Elective Total Hip and Total Knee Replacement Surgeries in the English National Health Service.

Background: Major orthopedic surgery, such as elective total hip replacement (eTHR) and elective total knee replacement (eTKR), are associated with a higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) than other surgical procedures. Little is known, however, about the cost-effectiveness of VTE prophylaxis strategies in people undergoing these procedures. Aim: The aim of this work was to assess the cost-effectiveness of these strategies from the English National Health Service perspective to inform NICE guideline (NG89) recommendations. Materials and Methods: Cost-utility analysis, using decision modeling, was undertaken to compare 15 VTE prophylaxis strategies for eTHR and 12 for eTKR, in addition to "no prophylaxis" strategy. The analysis complied with the NICE Reference Case. Structure and assumptions were agreed with the guideline committee. Incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) was calculated, vs. the model comparator (LMWH+ antiembolism stockings), at a threshold of £20,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The model was run probabilistically. Deterministic sensitivity analyses (SAs) were undertaken to assess the robustness of the results. Results: The most cost-effective strategies were LMWH for 10 days followed by aspirin for 28 days (INMB = £530 [95% CI: -£784 to £1,103], probability of being most cost-effective = 72%) for eTHR, and foot pump (INMB = £353 [95% CI: -£101 to £665]; probability of being most cost-effective = 18%) for eTKR. There was considerable uncertainty regarding the cost-effectiveness ranking in the eTKR analysis. The results were robust to change in all SAs. Conclusions: For eTHR, LMWH (standard dose) for 10 days followed by aspirin for 28 days is the most cost-effective VTE prophylaxis strategy. For eTKR, the results are highly uncertain but foot pump appeared to be the most cost-effective strategy, followed closely by aspirin (low dose). Future research should focus on assessing cost-effectiveness of VTE prophylaxis in the eTKR population.