Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
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.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11381708 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078777 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!