Background-Oral anticoagulation therapy is the primary tool in reducing stroke risk in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation but is underused. Patients nonpersistent with therapy contribute to this underuse. The objective of this study was to compare persistence rates in newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients treated with warfarin versus dabigatran as their oral anticoagulation. Methods and Results-US Department of Defense administrative claims were used to identify patients receiving warfarin or dabigatran between October 28, 2010, and June 30, 2012. Patient records were examined for a minimum of 12 months before index date to restrict the analyses to those newly diagnosed with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and naive-to-treatment, identifying 1775 on warfarin and 3370 on dabigatran. Propensity score matching was used to identify 1745 matched pairs. Persistence was defined as time on therapy to discontinuation. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to depict persistence over time. Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the factors significantly associated with persistence. Using a 60-day permissible medication gap, the persistence rates were higher for dabigatran than for warfarin at both 6 months (72% versus 53%) and 1 year (63% versus 39%
Purpose. Acute healthcare utilization of stroke and bleeding has been previously examined among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). The long-term cost of such outcomes over several years is not well understood. Methods. Using 1999–2009 Medicare medical and enrollment data, we identified incident NVAF patients without history of stroke or bleeding. Patients were followed from the first occurrence of ischemic stroke, major bleeding, or intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) resulting in hospitalization. Those with events were matched with 1–5 NVAF patients without events. Total incremental costs of events were calculated as the difference between costs for patients with events and matched controls for up to 3 years. Results. Among the 25,465 patients who experienced events, 94.5% were successfully matched. In the first year after event, average incremental costs were $32,900 for ischemic stroke, $23,414 for major bleeding, and $47,640 for ICH. At 3 years after these events, costs remained elevated by $3,156–$5,400 per annum. Conclusion. While the costs of stroke and bleeding among patients with NVAF are most dramatic in the first year, utilization remained elevated at 3 years. Cost consequences extend beyond the initial year after these events and should be accounted for when assessing the cost-effectiveness of treatment regimens for stroke prevention.
Dabigatran is approved for stroke risk reduction in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Data from diverse clinical practice settings will help establish whether the risk:benefit ratio seen in clinical trials is comparable with routine clinical care. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran and warfarin in clinical practice. We undertook a propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort study (N=12,793 per group; mean age 74) comparing treatment with dabigatran or warfarin in the US Department of Defense claims database, October 2009 to July 2013. Treatment-naïve patients with first prescription claim for dabigatran (either FDA-approved dose) or warfarin between October 2010 and July 2012 (index) and a diagnosis of NVAF during the 12 months before index date were included. Primary outcomes were stroke and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, major gastrointestinal (GI), urogenital or other bleeding, myocardial infarction (MI) and death. Time-to-event was investigated using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Outcomes comparisons were made utilising Cox-proportional hazards models of PSM groups. Dabigatran users experienced fewer strokes (adjusted hazard ratio [95 % confidence intervals] 0.73 [0.55-0.97]), major intracranial (0.49 [0.30-0.79]), urogenital (0.36 [0.18-0.74]) and other (0.38 [0.22-0.66]) bleeding, MI (0.65 [0.45-0.95]) and deaths (0.64 [0.55-0.74]) than the warfarin group. Major bleeding (0.87 [0.74-1.03]) and major GI bleeding (1.13 [0.94-1.37]) was similar between groups and major lower GI bleeding events were more frequent (1.30 [1.04-1.62]) with dabigatran. In conclusion, compared with warfarin, dabigatran treatment was associated with a lower risk of stroke and most outcomes measured, but increased incidence of major lower GI bleeding.
Adherence in patients with AF is complex and involves multiple factors, some specific to each individual and others more general. This model identifies an adherence process that can guide opportunities for effective interventions, such as educational and behavioral programs targeted at these processes, to improve patient adherence to OA medication.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) afflicts nearly 3 million people in the United States annually, the large majority of whom are Medicare beneficiaries with other chronic illnesses. Beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions have high hospitalization and readmission rates but evidence on factors associated with readmissions is limited, and little is known about differences in rates between beneficiaries with and without AF. In a retrospective analysis of Medicare claims data, the relationship between outpatient visits within 14 days after hospital discharge and readmission was examined for beneficiaries with AF or other chronic conditions. About half of those beneficiaries with a hospitalization had an outpatient visit within 14 days of discharge. Readmission rates were 11% to 24% lower for beneficiaries with an outpatient visit than for those without one (P < .01). These findings suggest that follow-up care shortly after discharge may lower readmissions for patients with AF or other chronic conditions.
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.