Abstract
Objectives: To explore the acceptability and feasibility of detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) by emergency medical services (EMS) and identify potential barriers and facilitators to implementing a formal pathway to facilitate follow-up in primary care, which could reduce the risk of AF-related stroke.
Design: Qualitative study using focus groups and one-to-one interviews guided by a semistructured topic guide.
Setting: North East England.
Participants: Focus groups with 18 members of the public and one-to-one online interviews with 11 healthcare and service providers (six paramedics and five experts representing cardiology, general practice (GP), public health, research, policy and commissioning).
Results: All participant groups were supportive of a role of EMS in identifying AF as part of routine assessment and formalising the response to AF detection. However, this should not create delays for EMS since rate-controlled AF is non-urgent and alternative community mechanisms exist to manage it. Public participants were concerned about communication of the AF diagnosis and whether this should be ‘on scene’ or in a subsequent GP appointment. Paramedics reported frequent incidental identification of AF, but it is not always clear ‘on scene’ that this is a new diagnosis, and there is variation in practice regarding whether (and how) this is communicated to the GP. Paramedics also focused on ensuring the safety of non-conveyed patients and a perceived need for an ‘active’ reporting process, so that a finding of AF was actioned. Field experts felt that a formal pathway would be useful and favoured a simple intervention without adding to time pressures unnecessarily.
Conclusions: There is support for the development of a formal pathway to ensure follow-up for people with AF that is incidentally detected by EMS. This has the potential to improve anticoagulation rates and reduce the risk of stroke.
Design: Qualitative study using focus groups and one-to-one interviews guided by a semistructured topic guide.
Setting: North East England.
Participants: Focus groups with 18 members of the public and one-to-one online interviews with 11 healthcare and service providers (six paramedics and five experts representing cardiology, general practice (GP), public health, research, policy and commissioning).
Results: All participant groups were supportive of a role of EMS in identifying AF as part of routine assessment and formalising the response to AF detection. However, this should not create delays for EMS since rate-controlled AF is non-urgent and alternative community mechanisms exist to manage it. Public participants were concerned about communication of the AF diagnosis and whether this should be ‘on scene’ or in a subsequent GP appointment. Paramedics reported frequent incidental identification of AF, but it is not always clear ‘on scene’ that this is a new diagnosis, and there is variation in practice regarding whether (and how) this is communicated to the GP. Paramedics also focused on ensuring the safety of non-conveyed patients and a perceived need for an ‘active’ reporting process, so that a finding of AF was actioned. Field experts felt that a formal pathway would be useful and favoured a simple intervention without adding to time pressures unnecessarily.
Conclusions: There is support for the development of a formal pathway to ensure follow-up for people with AF that is incidentally detected by EMS. This has the potential to improve anticoagulation rates and reduce the risk of stroke.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | e078777 |
Pages (from-to) | 1-9 |
Number of pages | 9 |
Journal | BMJ Open |
Volume | 14 |
Issue number | 9 |
Early online date | 5 Sept 2024 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 5 Sept 2024 |
Keywords
- preventive medicine
- public health
- anticoagulation
- cardiology