2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.07.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Underuse of oral anticoagulants in privately insured patients with atrial fibrillation: A population being targeted by the IMplementation of a randomized controlled trial to imProve treatment with oral AntiCoagulanTs in patients with Atrial Fibrillation (IMPACT-AFib)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
12
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
12
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Two similarly designed randomized clinical trials, one in hypertension and one in heart failure, using coded and text data in outpatient electronic health records, found that outpatient pharmacist intervention led to a 34% reduction in any adverse drug events and medication errors 63,64 . Another clinical trial, IMPACT‐AFib, was conducted in 5 health plans to assess the impact of mailing information about the use of anticoagulants to 80,000 patients with atrial fibrillation who met clinical guidelines for anticoagulant treatment for stroke prevention and were not on therapy and to their providers 65,66 . The trial compared early vs. delayed (12 months later) communication.…”
Section: Specific Issues With the Use Of Real‐world Data To Assess The Impact Of Regulatory Actionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two similarly designed randomized clinical trials, one in hypertension and one in heart failure, using coded and text data in outpatient electronic health records, found that outpatient pharmacist intervention led to a 34% reduction in any adverse drug events and medication errors 63,64 . Another clinical trial, IMPACT‐AFib, was conducted in 5 health plans to assess the impact of mailing information about the use of anticoagulants to 80,000 patients with atrial fibrillation who met clinical guidelines for anticoagulant treatment for stroke prevention and were not on therapy and to their providers 65,66 . The trial compared early vs. delayed (12 months later) communication.…”
Section: Specific Issues With the Use Of Real‐world Data To Assess The Impact Of Regulatory Actionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Earlier studies have shown significant underutilization of oral anti-coagulants (OACs) in AF patients at high risk of stroke [ 6 9 ]. This low utilization has persisted even after the introduction of direct acting oral anti-coagulants (DOACs) despite their ease of use by the patients.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…IMPACT-AFib (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03259373 ) was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, educational intervention randomized clinical trial conducted from September 25, 2017, to May 1, 2019 (trial protocol and statistical analysis plan in Supplement 1 ). 22 Patients were randomized to receive an intervention of patient and clinician education (eFigure 1 and eFigure 2 in Supplement 2 ) either at the inception of the study (intervention) or after 1 year (the usual-care control). Patients and their treating clinicians were identified through health insurance claims data from commercially insured and Medicare Advantage populations.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among more than 17 million members enrolled in the 5 health plans, 241 044 were randomized after meeting all inclusion and exclusion criteria, including patients treated and not treated with OACs, from whom we identified the primary analysis subset of those not receiving OACs (determined at baseline for the intervention cohort and determined [retrospectively to match the baseline status] after 12 months in the control group). 22 Missing baseline data necessary to contact patients or clinicians at 1 data partner resulted in imbalances between the intervention and control patients from that data partner; all patients from that data partner were excluded from the primary analysis. The primary analysis included 4 data partners (47 333 patients); the fifth data partner (12 772 patients) was included in a sensitivity analysis (eTable 1 and eFigures 3-5 in Supplement 2 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%