Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30371161›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2018

SUPPORT-AF: Piloting a Multi-Faceted, Electronic Medical Record-Based Intervention to Improve Prescription of Anticoagulation.

Alok Kapoor, Azraa Amroze, Jessica Golden, Sybil Crawford, Kevin O'Day, Rasha Elhag, Ahmed Nagy, Steve A Lubitz, Jane S Saczynski, Jomol Mathew and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Alok Kapoor1 University of Massachusetts Memorial Health Care Worcester MA.
Azraa Amroze3 Meyers Primary Care Institute a joint endeavor of University of Massachusetts Medical School, Reliant Medical Group, and Fallon Health Worcester MA.
Jessica Golden2 University of Massachusetts Medical School Worcester MA.
Sybil Crawford2 University of Massachusetts Medical School Worcester MA.
Kevin O'Day1 University of Massachusetts Memorial Health Care Worcester MA.
Rasha Elhag1 University of Massachusetts Memorial Health Care Worcester MA.
Ahmed Nagy1 University of Massachusetts Memorial Health Care Worcester MA.
Steve A Lubitz4 Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA.
Jane S Saczynski2 University of Massachusetts Medical School Worcester MA.
Jomol Mathew2 University of Massachusetts Medical School Worcester MA.
David D McManus1 University of Massachusetts Memorial Health Care Worcester MA.

Funding

Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Elements in Atrial Fibrillation (SAGE-AF)R01HL126911 · NHLBI · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI MCMANUS, DAVID D., SACZYNSKI, JANE STEELE · 2016 to 2019
$3.2M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL126911
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Only 50% of eligible atrial fibrillation ( AF ) patients receive anticoagulation ( AC ). Feasibility and effectiveness of electronic medical record (EMR)-based interventions to profile and raise provider AC percentage is poorly understood. The SUPPORT-AF (Supporting Use of AC Through Provider Profiling of Oral AC Therapy for AF) study aims to improve rates of adherence to AC guidelines by developing and delivering supportive tools based on the EMR to providers treating patients with AF. Methods and Results We emailed cardiologists and community-based primary care providers affiliated with our institution reports of their AC percentage relative to peers. We also sent an electronic medical record-based message to these providers the day before an appointment with an atrial fibrillation patient who was eligible but not receiving AC . The electronic medical record message asked the provider to discuss AC with the patient if he or she deemed it appropriate. To assess feasibility, we tracked provider review of our correspondence. We also tracked the change in AC for intervention providers relative to alternate primary care providers not receiving our intervention. We identified 3786, 1054, and 566 patients cared for by 49 cardiology providers, 90 community-based primary care providers, and 88 control providers, respectively. At baseline, the percentage of AC was 71.3%, 63.5%, and 58.3% for these 3 respective groups. Intervention providers reviewed our e-mails and electronic medical record messages 45% and 96% of the time, respectively. For providers responding, patient refusal was the most common reason for patients not being on AC (21%) followed by high bleeding risk (19%). At follow-up 10 weeks later, change in AC was no different for either cardiology or community-based primary care providers relative to controls (0.2% lower and 0.01% higher, respectively). Conclusions Our intervention profiling AC was feasible, but not sufficient to increase AC in our population.

Indexed as

CardiologistsGuideline AdherencePhysicians, Primary CareQuality ImprovementAgedAnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationDecision Support Systems, ClinicalElectronic Health RecordsFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsPractice Guidelines as TopicAnticoagulantsanticoagulationatrial fibrillationelectronic medical record

Identifiers

PMID30371161
PMCPMC6201433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.