Digital virtual ward versus standard of care for acute atrial fibrillation: A single centre non-randomised pilot comparison of clinical outcomes and cost

Clicks: 10
ID: 334166
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #68 of 80 articles by views in European Heart Journal - Digital Health

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) incurs significant healthcare costs, mainly from acute hospitalisations. Digitally-enabled models could provide hospital-level care at home for selected patients, but evidence in acute care remains inconsistent. Methods In a propensity score-matched, non-randomised comparative study using real-world data (January–December 2022). Adults with acute AF admitted to the AF virtual ward (AFVW) were matched 1:1 to standard-of-care (SOC) inpatients meeting AFVW eligibility criteria. The primary outcome was a composite of emergency readmissions, urgent care attendance, or death within 90 days. A separate cost analysis was undertaken from the National Health Service (NHS) secondary care perspective. Results Ninety-one AFVW patients were matched to 91 SOC patients. The primary outcome did not differ at 90 days (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.34-1.10). Emergency bed-day use following readmission was higher in AFVW cohort (0.42 vs 0.07 per spell; ratio 6.04; 95% CI 2.70-15.90), although the readmission rate itself was similar (7.7% versus 7.0%). Thirty-day emergency attendances, outpatient appointments, and mortality were similar. In a separate, clinically screened but non-propensity-matched population (75 AFVW, 315 SOC patients), mean direct secondary-care cost per patient was £948 versus £1,631, an adjusted saving of £642. Friends and Family Test respondents rated the AFVW positively. Conclusion We found no significant difference in adverse outcomes between an acute AF virtual ward and matched SOC, but the study was not powered for non-inferiority, and downstream emergency bed-day use was higher in the virtual ward arm. AFVW costs were lower in an exploratory analysis. These findings require confirmation in future studies.
Reference Key
openalex_W7223671839 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Ahmed I. Kotb, Suzanne Armstrong, Ibrahim Antoun, Sarah Anthony, Rachel Hobson, Joseph Barker, Ivelin M Koev, Paul Smith, Shui Hao Chin, Guiqing Yao, G. André Ng
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal European Heart Journal - Digital Health
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ehjdh/ztag170
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjdh/ztag170
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.