Discussion
In this study, we present the first real-world experience of a virtual ward for hospital patients exhibiting AF with a fast ventricular response. It illustrates that the use of digital technology can support the provision of efficient clinical care outside of the traditional bricks-and-mortar hospital setting for this population. The aim of this virtual ward was not only to provide comparable levels of safety and efficacy to hospital-based care, acting as an alternative to hospital admission, but also to facilitate relatively longer (virtual) stays, creating newer models where the boundaries between community and hospital-led care were merged, allowing for a unified patient-centred care approach. Patients on the virtual ward were treated as they would be in a hospital bed, in accordance with the European Society of Cardiology 2020 AF guidelines,6 and the NICE 2021 guidelines for AF diagnosis and management.7
Out of 50 virtual admissions, 24 were identified and on-boarded to the virtual ward instead of the usual pathway of hospital admission, while the remaining 26 admissions comprised of in-patients discharged earlier from the hospital setting with plans for prolonged remote monitoring through the virtual ward. This included two patients who were frequently relapsing between AF and sinus rhythm while in hospital and were at risk of imminent re-admission, following hospital discharge.
It was challenging to assess how many rehospitalisations were avoided per every virtual admission. Any instance of initial clinical presentation recurrence (ie, the initial HR, symptoms and blood pressure that resulted in the patient’s index admission to hospital) where hospital admission was deferred because of a pharmacological intervention implemented virtually by the clinical team, was counted as a readmission avoidance. A total of 25 rehospitalisations were, therefore, prevented, according to this definition.
In total, these 50 virtual admissions resulted in 49 actual hospital admissions being avoided. With a usual length stay of 2–5 days for AF patients in a hospital bed in the routine care pathway, a total of between 98 and 245 bed-days were saved. This may justify the relatively prolonged length of stay per patient in this virtual ward, which can be further explained by two key considerations. First, this was a pilot study with a learning curve and a new process that required adjustment time for patients and staff to gain confidence. Second, the prolonged admissions allowed provision of a more integrated holistic approach to care and the formulation of long-term personalised plans. Nonetheless, the length of stay is expected to reduce as the service matures.
Furthermore, this novel pathway and the utilised applications were well received by patients, with the main negative comments addressing the initial difficulty with technology and expressing the need for more instant communication. The need for more communication might have been aggravated by the lack of continuous visibility of healthcare staff compared with the standard of care in hospital. Another theme to emerge were negative comments related to the physical discharge processes after being onboarded to the virtual ward, and while we acknowledge that this was not directly under our control, we believe that there is scope for improvement once the new pathway is well integrated. Despite these remarks, there was obvious endorsement from patients regarding the service, with none of the patients asking to stop the monitoring prematurely and all FFT participants saying they would recommend the service. Additionally, ensuring digital equity was a key factor during the set-up of this virtual ward as patients who did not possess smartphones were provided with electronic tablets on loan to use for sending measurements following demonstration on using the equipment. Digital inclusion was further demonstrated with enrolling patients in their 80s, along with two patients being registered blind.
Difficulties in dealing with technology remains one of the major obstacles facing the establishment of remote care pathways. Weng et al demonstrated a promising impact of virtual pathways on ambulatory care for AF patients referred for specialist care because of new-onset and/or symptomatic AF, yet the primary difficulty faced was patients not being able to use computer technology.8 In our study population, one patient declined to go on the virtual ward because of technological-related anxiety. This number is likely to increase with the wider adoption of the service and further measures to familiarise patients with the technology may be needed.
The service was secondary care-focused, where patients receive specialist-led care and management plans. This was reflected in a rhythm control strategy being adopted in the majority of patients with more than one-third of the patients being discharged in sinus rhythm due to spontaneous reversion. This is in line with recent evidence suggesting the favourable impact of early rhythm control on adverse cardiovascular events.9 Moreover, patients were discharged with definitive management plans and early destination therapy decisions with a third of the admissions culminating in a cardioversion referral and a third referred for catheter ablation.
Of note, remote management did not prevent medication optimisation or uptitration as one in five admissions received at least three remote pharmacological interventions.
When it comes to safety, the presence of three unplanned discharges resulting in readmissions, potentially illustrates a real-world practice and provides reassurance to healthcare professionals and patients that vigilance towards safety is among the hallmarks of this pathway as prompt escalation of care would be implemented if indicated.
There have been earlier trials at the establishment of virtual pathways for ambulatory care of AF, which mainly focused on outpatients referred for specialist care because of AF,8 or post-AF ablation virtual follow-up clinics.10 This study, however, presents the first AF virtual ward dealing with hospital-level patients with AF. While we acknowledge that more work is still needed, it provides a promising telemedicine-based care model that is able to provide safe and efficient patient-centred clinical care.
Limitations
Our study has several limitations. First, our population was predominantly Caucasian with only two patients of an ethnic minority group (Asian-British). This could be explained by the higher prevalence of AF among white ethnicity compared with other ethnic groups.11 This was an observational study with a lack of randomisation. It had a small sample size which was not derived from a formal power calculation, owing to inclusion of all patients meeting the study criteria, with the absence of a matched control group. Our analysis was focused on immediate outcomes and thus as a result, deficient in longitudinal follow-up data. Furthermore, the small sample size and the variable length of stay did not allow an accurate evaluation into cost-effectiveness and economic analysis. However, this was aimed to be a proof-of-concept study. Further work is still ongoing in a larger patient cohort with a matched control arm.