Summary. Background:In patients receiving oral anticoagulation, improved control can reduce adverse outcomes such as stroke and major hemorrhage. However, little is known about patient-level predictors of anticoagulation control. Objectives: To identify patient-level predictors of oral anticoagulation control in the outpatient setting. Patients/Methods: We studied 124 619 patients who received oral anticoagulation from the Veterans Health Administration from October 2006 to September 2008. The outcome was anticoagulation control, summarized using percentage of time in therapeutic International Normalized Ratio range (TTR). Data were divided into inception (first 6 months of therapy; 39 447 patients) and experienced (any time thereafter; 104 505 patients). Patientlevel predictors of TTR were examined by multivariable regression. Results: Mean TTRs were 48% for inception management and 61% for experienced management. During inception, important predictors of TTR included hospitalizations (the expected TTR was 7.3% lower for those with two or more hospitalizations than for the non-hospitalized), receipt of more medications (16 or more medications predicted a 4.3% lower than for patients with 0-7 medications), alcohol abuse () 4.6%), cancer () 3.1%), and bipolar disorder () 2.9%). During the experienced period, important predictors of TTR included hospitalizations (four or more hospitalizations predicted 9.4% lower TTR), more medications (16 or more medications predicted 5.1% lower TTR), alcohol abuse () 5.4%), female sex () 2.9%), cancer () 2.7%), dementia () 2.6%), non-alcohol substance abuse () 2.4%), and chronic liver disease () 2.3%). Conclusions: Some patients receiving oral anticoagulation therapy are more challenging to maintain within the therapeutic range than others. Our findings can be used to identify patients who require closer attention or innovative management strategies to maximize benefit and minimize harm from oral anticoagulation therapy.
Background-Oral anticoagulation is safer and more effective when patients receive high-quality care. However, there have been no prior efforts to measure quality of oral anticoagulation care or to risk adjust it to ensure credible comparisons. Our objective was to profile site performance in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) using risk-adjusted percent time in therapeutic range (TTR). Methods and Results-We included 124 551 patients who received outpatient oral anticoagulation from 100 VA sites of care for indications other than valvular heart disease from October 1, 2006, to September 30, 2008. We calculated TTR for each patient and mean TTR for each site of care. Expected TTR was calculated for each patient and each site based on the variables in the risk adjustment model, which included demographics, comorbid conditions, medications, and hospitalizations. Mean TTR for the entire sample was 58%. Site-observed TTR varied from 38% to 69% or from poor to excellent. Site-expected TTR varied from 54% to 62%. Site risk-adjusted performance ranged from 18% below expected to 12% above expected. Risk adjustment did not alter performance rankings for many sites, but for other sites, it made an important difference. For example, the site ranked 27th of 100 before risk adjustment was one of the best (risk-adjusted rank, 7). Risk-adjusted site rankings were consistent from year to year (correlation between years, 0.89). Conclusions-Risk-adjusted TTR can be used to profile the quality of outpatient oral anticoagulation in a large, integrated health system. This measure can serve as the basis for quality measurement and quality improvement efforts. (Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011;4:22-29.)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.