Use of vitamin K antagonists for secondary stroke prevention depends on the treating healthcare provider in Germany – results from the German AFNET registry

Table 2 Clinical parameters in 9,545 study patients with prior ischaemic stroke or TIA by type of centre

	ICC baseline	Univ. hospital vs. Regional hosp. vs. Cardiologist vs. GP/ Internist			Univ. hospital & Cardiologists vs. Reg. hosp.& GP/ Internist			Inpatients vs. Outpatients
	[%]	Residual ICC [%]	% ex-plained	p	Residual ICC [%]	% ex-plained	p	Residual ICC [%]	% ex-plained	p
Age	25.4	19.6	23.1	<0.0001	19.8	22.2	<0.0001	25.9	0	0.18
Male	0.0002	0.00002	88.9	0.01	0.0001	55.1	0.01	0.00006	74.1	0.07
Atrial fibrillation
First detected	12.5	6.2	50.5	0.17	10.7	14.9	0.16	7.3	41.5	0.07
Paroxysmal	9.6	7.8	18.5	0.001	9.6	0	0.19	7.3	24.0	0.02
Persistent	23.0	13.3	42.0	0.002	21.7	5.55	0.30	23.0	0	0.71
Permanent	20.2	14.4	28.7	0.08	20.3	0	0.89	15.6	22.6	0.03
CHADS₂ score	23.0	22.2	3.7	0.047	22.0	4.33	0.01	23.4	0	0.11
Mitral valve stenosis	0.0001	0.0001	0	0.63	0.0001	9.14	0.74	0.0001	0	0.35
Valve replacement	0.0008	0.00004	94.5	0.03	0.0002	72.7	0.39	0.0001	87.4	0.01
Heart failure
None	18.0	18.2	0	0.45	18.4	0	0.48	18.1	0	0.12
NYHA I	42.1	36.4	13.4	0.55	41.9	0.46	0.76	37.9	10.0	0.26
NYHA II	12.0	11.1	7.4	0.62	11.9	0.30	0.83	11.3	6.0	0.34
NYHA III	19.0	12.9	31.8	0.05	18.9	0.32	0.96	14.4	24.2	0.01
NYHA IV	29.0	20.0	31.2	0.003	26.9	7.4	0.14	22.3	23.0	<0.001
Diabetes mellitus	0.0006	0.00008	86.8	0.12	0.0001	77.3	0.03	0.0004	41.0	0.67
Arterial hypertension	9.6	9.5	1	0.62	9.7	0	0.31	9.9	0	0.47
Coronary artery disease	11.7	6	49.2	<0.001	9.9	15.1	0.23	7.1	39.7	0.0001
Peripheral artery disease	10.4	9.2	11.1	0.77	10.3	0.7	0.90	9.4	9.2	0.56
Chronic renal failure	4.3	3	30.7	0.005	4.7	0	0.49	2.8	34.5	<0.001
Patients with prior stroke
Anticoagulation	12.3	2.3	81.4	<0.001	3.5	79.3	<0.001	12.8	0	0.08
Patients without stroke
Anticoagulation	18.2	15.9	12.4	0.003	16.0	12.0	<0.001	17.9	1.41	0.07

Given are baseline intra-class correlations (ICC) as measures of the variability between centres, percent of centre variability explained by centre type or in- vs. outpatient, respectively, (“% explained”) with corresponding p value, and the residual ICC which could not be explained by the factor under consideration

ISSN: 1471-2377