{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029661016949152543, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001694915254237288, 'mean_word_length': 5.988165680473373, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation: Why is the treatment rate so low?

The incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is increasing in many countries along with aging demographics. Atrial fibrillation is clearly associated with an increased rate of stroke. Numerous large clinical trials have shown that dose‐adjusted warfarin can reduce the stroke rate in these patients, particularly in the elderly, and clear guidelines for the use of anticoagulants in such patients have been published. However, many studies show that treatment rates remain disappointingly low (≤50%). Numerous barriers to the use of dose‐adjusted warfarin exist, including practical, patient‐, physician‐, and healthcare system‐related barriers. These include the complex pharmacokinetics of warfarin, the need for continuous prothrombin time monitoring and dose adjustments, bleeding events, noncompliance, drug interactions, and increased costs of monitoring and therapy. Possible solutions to this problem are discussed and include improved patient and physician education, the use of anticoagulation clinics, new approaches to AF, and potential treatment improvements through use of newer anticoagulants.