Konsta Teppo, Jussi Jaakkola, Fausto Biancari, Olli Halminen, Miika Linna, Jari Haukka, Jukka Putaala, Pirjo Mustonen, Janne Kinnunen, Alex Luojus, Saga Itäinen-Strömberg, Juha Hartikainen, Aapo L. Aro, K. E. Juhani Airaksinen, Mika Lehto, University of Turku, University of Helsinki, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Turku University Hospital, University of Eastern Finland, Aalto-yliopisto, and Aalto University
Funding Information: Konsta Teppo: Research grants: The Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research. Jussi Jaakkola: none. Fausto Biancari: none Olli Halminen: none. Jukka Putaala: Putaala reports personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees and other from Bayer, grants and personal fees from BMS-Pfizer, personal fees from Portola, other from Amgen, personal fees from Herantis Pharma, personal fees from Terve Media, other from Vital Signum, personal fees from Abbott, outside the submitted work. Pirjo Mustonen: Consultant: Roche, BMS-Pfizer-alliance, Novartis Finland, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD Finland. Jari Haukka: Consultant: Research Janssen R&D; Speaker: Bayer Finland. Miika Linna: Speaker: BMSPfizer-alliance, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim. Juha Hartikainen: Research grants: The Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research, EU Horizon 2020, EU FP7. Advisory Board Member: BMS-Pfizer-alliance, Novo Nordisk, Amgen. Speaker: Cardiome, Bayer. K.E. Juhani Airaksinen: Research grants: The Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research; Speaker: Bayer, Pfizer and Boehringer-Ingelheim. Member in the advisory boards: Bayer, Pfizer and AstraZeneca. Mika Lehto: Consultant: BMS-Pfizer-alliance, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and MSD; Speaker: BMS-Pfizer-alliance, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Terve Media and Orion Pharma. Research grants: Aarne Koskelo Foundation, The Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research, and Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District research fund, Boehringer-Ingelheim. Funding Information: This work was supported by the Aarne Koskelo Foundation, The Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research, and Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District research fund (TYH2019309). The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Background: Rural–urban disparities have been reported in the access, utilization, and quality of healthcare. We aimed to assess whether use of antiarrhythmic therapies (AATs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) differs between those with rural and urban residence. Methods: The registry-based FinACAF cohort covers all patients with AF from all levels of care in Finland. Patients were divided into rural and urban categories and into urbanization degree tertiles based on their municipality of residence at the time of AF diagnosis. The primary outcome was the use of any AAT, including cardioversion, catheter ablation, and fulfilled antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) prescription. Results: We identified 177,529 patients (49.9% female, mean age 73.0 (SD13.0) years) with incident AF during 2010–2018. Except for AADs, the differences in AAT use were nonsignificant when patients were stratified according to the rural–urban classification system (urban vs. rural adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs) with 95% CIs for anyAAT 1.01 (0.99–1.03), AADs 1.11 (1.07–1.15), cardioversion 1.01 (0.98–1.03), catheter ablation 1.05 (0.98–1.12)). However, slightly higher use of all rhythm control modalities was observed in the highest urbanization degree tertile when compared to the lowest tertile (aIRRs with 95% Cis for any AAT 1.06 (1.03–1.08), AADs 1.18 (1.14–1.23), cardioversion 1.05 (1.02–1.08), catheter ablation 1.10 (1.02–1.19)). Conclusions: This nationwide retrospective cohort study observed that urban residence is associated with higher use of AADs in patients with incident AF. Otherwise, the observed disparities were only marginal, suggesting that in the use of rhythm control therapies, no large rural–urban inequity exists in Finland.