A community-based educational intervention to improve antithrombotic drug use in atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that antithrombotics are effective in reducing the risk of stroke in atrial fibrillation (AF), they remain underused. OBJECTIVE: To perform a controlled trial of a comprehensive educational program promoting the rational prescribing of antithrombotics for stroke prevention in AF. METHODS: The intervention was conducted in Southern Tasmania, Australia, using Northern Tasmania as a control area. General practitioners were sent locally produced guidelines on stroke risk stratification and antithrombotic drug use in AF, which were followed by academic detailing visits. Outcomes were measured using evaluation feedback from the general practitioners, and drug utilization data were provided by a series of patients presenting to the hospital with an admission diagnosis of AF and dispensing of antithrombotic therapy under the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. RESULTS: During the educational intervention, 272 guidelines were mailed and, subsequently, 162 general practitioners were visited and the guidelines discussed. Hospital admission data before and after the intervention revealed a significant increase in the use of warfarin in patients at high risk of stroke (33% vs 46% of eligible patients; p < 0.05). Analysis of prescription data for warfarin also indicated that the increase in use of warfarin within the intervention region was significantly greater than for the control region (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The educational program described here led to a significant increase in the prescribing of warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with AF.

Accuracy and clinical usefulness of the near-patient testing CoaguChek S international normalised ratio monitor in rural medical practice.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy and clinical usefulness of the near-patient testing CoaguChek S INR monitor in rural medical practice. DESIGN, SETTING AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: General practices were identified through Australian university departments of rural health. Study investigators trained general practitioners and/or practice nurses in the use of the CoaguChek S INR monitor. General practices obtained a fingerprick sample for testing with the INR monitor to compare with conventional pathology testing for accuracy. An evaluation questionnaire was administered to users of the machine to assess ease of use and clinical usefulness. RESULTS: A total of 169 patients from 15 general practice sites provided 401 paired (CoaguChek S and laboratory) INR results. The CoaguChek S was found to be accurate when compared to laboratory INR (r = 0.89), despite complicating variables such as multiple users of the monitor and multiple laboratories used for comparison with the CoaguChek S INR. Overall, 88% of dual INR measurements were within 0.5 INR units of each other. For laboratory INR /= 3.6, 97%, 90% and 57% of readings were within 0.5 INR units, respectively. Clinical agreement occurred 93% and 90% of the time against published expanded and narrow criteria, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of near-patient testing, with appropriate training and quality assurance programs, has the potential to increase the safety and efficacy of warfarin therapy in rural and remote communities.

Ipratropium treatment of acute airways disease.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the use of ipratropium bromide in adults with acute exacerbation of either asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) during admission and at discharge from 3 teaching hospitals. METHODS: An extensive range of clinical and demographic data was retrospectively extracted from the medical records of consecutive patients aged >/=12 years admitted to the medical wards of the hospitals during 1999-2001 with acute exacerbations of asthma or COPD, either as a primary diagnosis or as a major comorbidity. RESULTS: Data were gathered for 302 patients (97 with asthma, 205 with COPD). Almost 90% of all patients received ipratropium bromide during their hospital admission. The indication for using ipratropium bromide during hospitalization was considered appropriate in 84% of the asthma patients and 68% of the COPD patients. Over 20% of the patients with asthma had been using ipratropium bromide prior to the hospital admission, and almost one-third of the patients with asthma were discharged with ipratropium bromide, even though its role in chronic asthma is limited. More than 90% of the patients received nebulized drug therapy during their hospital stay, with 41% being prescribed nebulized therapy at discharge. This was often considered inappropriate, given that >50% of all patients had been using inhaler devices and nebulizers concurrently while hospitalized. CONCLUSIONS: In the majority of cases, ipratropium bromide had been used during hospitalization in accordance with guidelines for the management of acute exacerbations of asthma or COPD. However, there was also evidence of potentially inappropriate prolonged use of the agent in the community setting, particularly for asthma. Also of concern was the relatively high use of nebulized drug therapy when delivery via other means was appropriate.