IntroductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia associated with 30% of strokes, as well as other cardiovascular disease, dementia and death. AF meets many criteria for screening, but there is limited evidence that AF screening reduces stroke. Consequently, no countries recommend national screening programmes for AF. The Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke (SAFER) trial aims to determine whether screening for AF is effective at reducing risk of stroke. The aim of the pilot study is to assess feasibility of the main trial and inform implementation of screening and trial procedures.Methods and analysisSAFER is planned to be a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) of over 100 000 participants aged 70 years and over, not on long-term anticoagulation therapy at baseline, with an average follow-up of 5 years. Participants are asked to record four traces every day for 3 weeks on a hand-held single-lead ECG device. Cardiologists remotely confirm episodes of AF identified by the device algorithm, and general practitioners follow-up with anticoagulation as appropriate. The pilot study is a cluster RCT in 36 UK general practices, randomised 2:1 control to intervention, recruiting approximately 12 600 participants. Pilot study outcomes include AF detection rate, anticoagulation uptake and other parameters to incorporate into sample size calculations for the main trial. Questionnaires sent to a sample of participants will assess impact of screening on psychological health. Process evaluation and qualitative studies will underpin implementation of screening during the main trial. An economic evaluation using the pilot data will confirm whether it is plausible that screening might be cost-effective.Ethics and disseminationThe London—Central Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1597) and Confidentiality Advisory Group (19/CAG/0226) provided ethical approval. Dissemination will be via publications, patient-friendly summaries, reports and engagement with the UK National Screening Committee.Trial registration numberISRCTN72104369.

ObjectiveTo describe patterns of anticoagulation prescription and persistence for those aged ≥65 years with atrial fibrillation (AF).MethodsDescriptive cohort study using electronic general practice records of patients in England, who attended an influenza vaccination aged ≥65 years and were diagnosed with AF between 2008 and 2018. Patients were stratified by 10-year age group and year of diagnosis. Proportion anticoagulated, type of anticoagulation (direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) or warfarin) initiated at diagnosis and persistence with anticoagulation over time are reported.Results42 290 patients (49% female), aged 65–74 (n=11 722), 75–84 (n=19 055) and 85+ (n=11 513) years at AF diagnosis are included. Prescription of anticoagulation at diagnosis increased over the time period from 55% to 86% in people aged 65–74 years, from 54% to 86% in people aged 75–84 years and from 27% to 75% in people aged 85 years and over. By 2018, 92% of patients with newly diagnosed AF were started on a DOAC. Survivor function for 5-year persistence in patients prescribed DOAC was 0.80 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.82) and for warfarin 0.71 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.72). Survivor function for any anticoagulation at 5 years was 0.79 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.81), 0.73 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.75) and 0.58 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.64) for people aged 65–74, 75–84 and 85+ years, respectively.ConclusionsRates of anticoagulation in AF in those aged ≥65 years have increased from 2008 to 2018, over which time period there has been a shift from initiating anticoagulation with warfarin to DOAC. Persistence with anticoagulation is higher in people on DOACs than on warfarin and in people aged <85 years.

ObjectivesAtrial fibrillation (AF) is a heart condition associated with a fivefold increased risk of stroke. The condition can be detected in primary care and treatment can greatly reduce the risk of stroke. In recent years, a number of policy initiatives have tried to improve diagnosis and treatment of AF, including local National Health Service schemes and the Quality and Outcomes Framework. We aimed to examine trends in the incidence of recorded AF in primary care records from English practices between 2004 and 2018.DesignLongitudinal cohort study.SettingEnglish primary care electronic health records linked to Index of Multiple Deprivation data.ParticipantsCohort of 3.5 million patients over 40 years old registered in general practices in England, contributing 22 million person-years of observation between 2004 and 2018.Primary and secondary outcome measuresIncident AF was identified through newly recorded AF codes in the patients’ records. Yearly incidence rates were stratified by gender, age group and a measure of deprivation.ResultsIncidence rates were stable before 2010 and then rose and peaked in 2015 at 5.07 (95% CI 4.94 to 5.20) cases per 1000 person-years. Incidence was higher in males (4.95 (95% CI 4.91 to 4.99) cases per 1000 person-years vs 4.12 (95% CI 4.08 to 4.16) in females) and rises markedly with age (0.58 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.59) cases per 1000 person-years in 40–54 years old vs 21.7 (95% CI 21.4 to 22.0) cases in over 85s). The increase in incidence over time was observed mainly in people over the age of 75, particularly men. There was no evidence that temporal trends in incidence were associated with deprivation.ConclusionsChanges in clinical practice and policy initiatives since 2004 have been associated with increased rates of diagnosis of AF up until 2015, but rates declined from 2015 to 2018.

No abstract

ObjectiveIn order to address the lack of data on the health and healthcare needs of trans and non-binary adults, NHS England includes questions asking about both gender and trans status in its surveys to support quality improvement programmes.We used self-reported data from the GP Patient Survey to answer the research question: what are the demographic characteristics, health conditions and healthcare experiences of trans and non-binary adults in England?Design/settingNationally representative, population-based cross-sectional survey in England with survey data collection from January to March 2021.Participants840 691 survey respondents including 6333 trans and non-binary adults.OutcomesWe calculated weighted descriptive statistics, and using logistic regression explored 15 long-term physical and mental health conditions, and 18 patient experience items, covering overall experience, access, communication and continuity.ResultsTrans and non-binary adults were younger, more likely to be from Asian, black, mixed or other ethnic groups and more likely to live in more deprived parts of the country. Age-specific patterns of long-term conditions were broadly similar among trans and non-binary adults compared with all other survey respondents, with some variation by condition. Overall, inequalities in long-term health conditions were largest for autism: OR (95% CI), 5.8 (5.0 to 6.6), dementia: 3.1 (2.5 to 3.9), learning disabilities: 2.8 (2.4 to 3.2) and mental health: 2.0 (1.9 to 2.2), with variation by age. In healthcare experience, disparities are much greater for interpersonal communication (OR for reporting a positive experience, range 0.4 to 0.7 across items) than access (OR range 0.8 to 1.2). Additionally, trans and non-binary adults report much higher preference for continuity 1.7 (1.6 to 1.8), with no evidence of any differences in being able to see or speak to a preferred general practitioner.ConclusionThis research adds up to date evidence about population demographics, health and healthcare needs to support healthcare improvement for trans and non-binary adults.