Search

Choosing an antiplatelet strategy in patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) at high bleeding risk (HBR), undergoing post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), is complex. We used a unique open-source approach (crowdsourcing) to document if practices varied across a small, global cross-section of antiplatelet prescribers in the post-PCI setting.Five-hundred and fifty-nine professionals from 70 countries (the 'crowd') completed questionnaires containing single- or multi-option and free form questions regarding antiplatelet clinical practice in post-PCI NSTE-ACS patients at HBR. A threshold of 75% defined 'agreement'. There was strong agreement favouring monotherapy with either aspirin or a P2YThe crowdsourcing methodology showed potential as a tool to assess current practice and variation on a global scale and to achieve a broad demographic representation. These preliminary results indicate a high degree of variation with respect to duration of DAPT, monotherapy drug of choice following DAPT and how thrombotic and bleeding risk are assessed. Further investigations should concentrate on interrogating practice variation between key demographic groups.

Aims CORE is a continuing medical education initiative designed to support the evidence-based management of heart failure (HF) in the primary and secondary care settings. The goal of the CORE Needs Assessment Survey is to describe current clinical practice patterns and attitudes among global stakeholders in HF care. Methods and results The CORE Steering Committee guided the development of survey questions to assess clinical practice, confidence, and attitudes/perceptions among cardiologists, primary care physicians, and nurses involved in HF management. In total, 346 healthcare professionals from Australia (n = 59), Austria (n = 59), Canada (n = 60), Spain (n = 58), Sweden (n = 52), and the UK (n = 58) contributed survey data. Results revealed multiple gaps over the spectrum of HF care, including diagnosis (low recognition of the signs and symptoms of HF and limited use of diagnostic tests), treatment planning (underuse of recommended agents and subtherapeutic dosing), treatment monitoring and adjustment (lack of adherence to recommendations), and long-term management (low confidence in providing patient education). Although primary care and specialist physicians and nurses shared common unmet needs, healthcare professional-specific clinical gaps were also identified. Conclusions The CORE Needs Assessment Survey provides timely data describing current clinical practices and attitudes among physicians and nurses regarding key aspects of HF care. These findings will be useful for guiding the development of interventions tailored to the specific educational needs of different provider types and designed to support the evidence-based care of patients with HF.