Search

Background: Minimising risk factors through secondary prevention behaviour is challenging for patients following an acute coronary syndrome. Cognitive impairment can potentially make these changes more difficult. However, cognitive impairment prevalence in acute coronary syndrome patients is poorly understood., Design: This study was based on a systematic review., Methods: A systematic review was conducted of PubMed, Medline, PsycINFO and Cochrane databases up to March 2019, to identify studies reporting the prevalence of cognitive impairment in acute coronary syndrome patients. Predefined inclusion criteria were specified, including use of a validated cognitive impairment screening tool. Studies were excluded if patients had diagnosed dementia or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Strengthening The Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Cochrane Risk of Bias tools were used to assess quality., Results: From 747 potential studies, nine were included. The total sample size was 6457 (range 53-2174), mean age range was 51.3-77.4 years, and range of proportions of males was 57-100%. Reported cognitive impairment prevalence rates varied substantially (9-85%) with no clear pattern over time. From the two studies which examined domains, verbal fluency, memory and language were affected the most. Meta-analysis could not be undertaken due to diverse screening tools ( n  = 9), cut-off scores and screening timepoints., Conclusions: Cognitive impairment in acute coronary syndrome patients is currently poorly described, and likely affects a substantial number of acute coronary syndrome patients who remain undetected and have the potential to develop to dementia in the future. As domains are most affected, this could impact understanding and retention of health education. Research is needed to accurately determine the prevalence of cognitive impairment in acute coronary syndrome patients and create suitable standardised measures and thresholds.

Background: People with unknown atrial fibrillation (AF), who are often asymptomatic, have a substantially increased risk of stroke. Although recommended in European guidelines, AF screening is not routinely performed. Screening at the time of influenza vaccination presents an ideal opportunity to detect AF in large numbers in a primary care medical setting, with an existing annual recall system for patients aged ≥65 years., Design: Cross-sectional pilot study of handheld smartphone electrocardiogram (iECG) screening to identify unknown AF., Methods: General practices in Sydney, Australia, were recruited during the influenza-vaccination period of April-June 2015. Practice nurses screened patients aged ≥65 years with a 30-second iECG, which has a validated algorithm for detecting AF in real time. In order to confirm the accuracy of the algorithm, two research cardiologists reviewed de-identified iECGs. In order to explore barriers and enablers, semi-structured interviews were conducted with selected nurses, practice managers and general practitioners., Results: Five general practices were recruited, and 973/2476 (39%) patients attending influenza vaccination were screened. Screening took an average of 5 minutes (range 1.5-10 minutes); however, abnormal iECGs required additional time. Newly identified AF was found in 8/973 patients (0.8%). The sensitivity of the iECG automated algorithm was 95% (95% confidence interval: 83-99%) and the specificity was 99% (95% confidence interval: 98-100%). Screening by practice nurses was well accepted by practice staff. Key enablers were the confidence and competence of nurses and a 'designated champion' to lead screening at the practice. Barriers were practice specific, and mainly related to staff time and funding., Conclusions: Screening with iECG during influenza vaccination by primary care nurses is feasible and well accepted by practice staff. Addressing barriers is likely to increase uptake., (© The European Society of Cardiology 2016.)

Background: The burden of atrial fibrillation (AF) is escalating even though it is potentially modifiable. Affected persons, at high risk of stroke and death, are typically not targeted for risk reduction. We aimed to determine if risk-factor interventions can improve physical functioning, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and cardiovascular risk in AF., Methods: We conducted a systematic review of clinical trials evaluating lifestyle and biomedical risk reduction interventions in AF patients. Trials were identified by searching electronic databases, reference lists and grey literature. Trials were included if conducted by a health professional, and reported changes in multiple risk factor levels or HRQoL., Results: Five trials, solely exercise based, were identified (166 participants): two randomised controlled trials, one quasi-experimental and two pre-post designs. Exercise capacity improved after 2-12 months in the intervention group in all trials. This was assessed by maximal oxygen uptake (two trials, 2.5-5.4 ml/kg/min (17-32%) improvement, p < 0.02); six-minute walking distance (one trial, 114 m (27%) improvement, p < 0.001); cumulated work (one trial, 564 W/min (37%) improvement, p < 0.001) and incremental exercise testing (one trial, 11 m/min (10%) improvement, p = 0.05). Three trials evaluated heart rate (HR), demonstrating HR reduction at rest (7-13 bpm, p < 0.05) and during exercise (9 bpm, p < 0.05). Two trials measured HRQoL, both reporting significant improvements in SF-36 physical summary scores., Conclusions: Literature suggests risk reduction interventions for AF can improve exercise levels, HRQoL and reduce HR, but the evidence base is small, methodologically compromised and focused on physical functioning. High-quality research in this area is required in order to help the multitudes of people living with AF.