Search

Background: Although rhythm control has failed to demonstrate long‐term benefits over rate control in longstanding episodes of atrial fibrillation (AF), there is little evidence concerning recent‐onset ones. We analyzed the benefits of rhythm and rate control in terms of symptoms alleviation and need for hospital admission in patients with recent‐onset AF. Methods: This was a multicenter, observational, cross‐sectional study with prospective standardized data collection carried out in 124 emergency departments (EDs). Clinical variables, treatment effectiveness, and outcomes (control of symptoms, final disposition) were analyzed in stable patients with recent‐onset AF consulting for AF‐related symptoms. Results: Of 421 patients included, rhythm control was chosen in 352 patients (83.6%), a global effectiveness of 84%. Rate control was performed in 69 patients (16.4%) and was achieved in 67 (97%) of them. Control of symptoms was achieved in 396 (94.1%) patients and was associated with a heart rate after treatment ≤ 110 beats/min (odds ratio [OR] = 14.346, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.90 to 52.70, p < 0.001) and a rhythm control strategy (OR = 2.78, 95% CI = 1.02 to 7.61, p = 0.046). Sixty patients (14.2%) were admitted: discharge was associated with a rhythm control strategy (OR = 2.22, 95% CI = 1.20‐4.60, p = 0.031) and admission was associated with a heart rate > 110 beats/min after treatment (OR = 29.71, 95% CI = 7.19 to 123.07, p < 0.001) and acute heart failure (OR = 9.45, 95% CI = 2.91 to 30.65, p < 0.001). Conclusion: In our study, recent‐onset AF patients in whom rhythm control was attempted in the ED had a high rate of symptoms' alleviation and a reduced rate of hospital admissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To determine whether income was associated with unexpected in-hospital mortality in older patients treated in Spanish public health system hospital emergency departments., Material and Methods: Fifty-one public health system hospital emergency departments in Spain voluntarily participated in the study. Together the hospitals covered 25% of the population aged 65 years or older included in all patient registers during a week in the pre-pandemic period (April 1-7, 2019) and a week during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 30 to April 5, 2020). We estimated a patient's gross income as the amount published for the postal code of the patient's address. We then calculated the standardized gross income (SGI) by dividing the patient's estimated income by the mean for the corresponding territory (Spanish autonomous community). The existence and strength of an association between the SGI and in-hospital mortality was evaluated by means of restricted cubic spline (RCS) curves adjusted for 10 patient characteristics at baseline. Odds ratios (ORs) for each income level were expressed in relation to a reference SGI of 1 (the mean income for the corresponding autonomous community). We compared the COVID-19 and pre-pandemic periods by means of first-order interactions., Results: Of the 35 280 patients attended in the 2 periods, gross income could be ascertained for 21 180 (60%), 15437 in the pre-pandemic period and 5746 during the COVID-19 period. SGIs were slightly higher for patients included before the pandemic (1.006 vs 0.994; P = .012). In-hospital mortality was 5.6% overall and higher during the pandemic (2.8% pre-pandemic vs 13.1% during COVID-19; P .001). The adjusted RCS curves showed that associations between income and mortality differed between the 2 periods (interaction P = .004). Whereas there were no significant income-influenced differences in mortality before the pandemic, mortality increased during the pandemic in the lowest-income population (SGI 0.5 OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.32-3.37) and in higher-income populations (SGI 1.5 OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.68, and SGI 2 OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.14-3.23). We found no significant differences between patients with COVID-19 and those with other diagnoses (interaction P = .667)., Conclusion: The gross income of patients attended in Spanish public health system hospital emergency departments, estimated according to a patient's address and postal code, was associated with in-hospital mortality, which was higher for patients with the lowest and 2 higher income levels. The reasons for these associations might be different for each income level and should be investigated in the future.

Objectives: The maintenance of sinus rhythm by means of antiarrhythmic drugs and/or upstream therapy to counter cardiac remodeling is fundamental to the management of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to analyze this approach and its appropriateness in the setting of hospital emergency departments., Material and Methods: Secondary analysis of data from the multicenter observational cross-sectional HERMES-AF study carried out in 124 hospitals representative of the Spanish national health service in 2011. Included were consecutive patients with AF restored to sinus rhythm who were discharged home from emergency care., Results: A total of 449 patients were included; 204 (45.4%) were already on sinus rhythm maintenance therapy. Of ,the 245 remaining patients, 107 (43.67%) were prescribed maintenance treatment in the emergency department, as follows: 41, an antiarrhythmic drug; 19, upstream therapy; and 49, both treatments. The selection of an antiarrhythmic drug did not follow guideline recommendations in 10 patients (11.8%). Antiarrhythmic drug prescription was associated with having had a prior episode of AF (odds ratio [OR], 2.024; 95% CI, 1.196-3.424; P = .009); a heart rate of more than 110 beats/min (OR, 2.147; 95% CI, 1.034-4.456, P = 0.40); and prescription of anticoagulation on discharge (OR, 1.862; 95% CI, 1.094-3.170; P = .022). Upstream therapy prescription was associated only with a heart rate over 110 beats/min (OR, 2.187; 95% CI, 1.005-4.757; P = .018). In total, 311 patients (69.23%) were discharged from the emergency department with sinus rhythm maintenance therapy: 87 with an antiarrhythmic drug, 117 with an upstream therapy, and 107 with both., Conclusion: Treatment to prevent the recurrence of AF is underprescribed in emergency departments. Increasing such prescription and ensuring the appropriateness of antiarrhythmic therapy prescribed are points emergency departments can improve in the interest of better sinus rhythm maintenance.