Secondary Prevention of Atrial Fibrilation

The proposed study is designed as a Hybrid Type 3 effectiveness-implementation study. This study design will enable the investigators to primarily focus on core implementation outcomes while also assessing the effectiveness of the intervention on clinical outcomes. Since this is a Type 3 Hybrid trial, there are both effectiveness and implementation evaluation components, but the primary focus is on the implementation outcomes of feasibility, acceptability, adoption, and appropriateness. The specific aims, data collection, and analytic plans are grounded in the Proctor Conceptual Model of Implementation Research that posits improvements in outcomes are dependent not only on the evidence-based interventions that are implemented but on the implementation strategies used to implement those interventions. The model distinguishes between the intervention strategy (evidence-based practice), different types of implementation strategies (system environment, organizational, group/learning, supervision, individual providers/consumers), and three levels of outcomes (implementation, service, and client). The appropriate outcome measures in each category (implementation, service, client) depend upon the specific evidence-based practice and local context.

AF patients with a BMI of ≥ 27 kg/m2, who are referred to outpatient cardiology clinic, inpatient cardiology service, or cardiology consult service at Boston Medical Center (BMC) will be screened until 50 participants are enrolled. Eligible participants will undergo 1:1 randomization to standard of care (SoC -group 1) or to the interdisciplinary AF program (intervention- group 2). Randomization will be performed using a computer randomizer algorithm with 5 blocks of 6 and 5 blocks of 4 in random order for a total of 50 participants. The rational for the randomization design is primarily for the purpose of feasibility and to establish effect sizes and guide the design of the future trial.

All patients will be enrolled for a total duration of six months. Outcomes will be measured via 30-minute individual interviews at the end of 6-months. The implementation and service outcomes will be examined including acceptability, appropriateness, adoption, feasibility, and patient centeredness, as well as the client outcomes of satisfaction, function and symptomatology. Data will be collected using both quantitative and qualitative data methods to determine which aspects of the program achieved good patient adherence and acceptability.