Key result
Stroke or systemic embolism in NOAC-treated atrial fibrillation patients incurred incremental healthcare costs nearly twice as high as major bleeding, persisting up to 4 years post-event.
Why the study?
What are the incremental healthcare costs associated with stroke/systemic embolism versus major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants?
What are the incremental healthcare costs associated with stroke/systemic embolism versus major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants?
In patients with atrial fibrillation on NOACs, stroke and systemic embolism incur nearly twice the incremental healthcare costs compared to major bleeding, with economic burdens persisting for at least 4 years.
Higher costs after stroke/SE than major bleeding in NOAC-treated AF may inform resource planning; extends economic data but leaves open causal and practice implications.
The incremental healthcare costs incurred by patients with vs without stroke/SE was nearly twice as high as those of patients with vs without MB. Moreover, each additional year up to 4 years after the first event was associated with an incremental cost for patients with a stroke/SE or MB event compared to those without an event.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rozjabek et al. (2019) studied this question. Stroke or systemic embolism in NOAC-treated atrial fibrillation patients incurred incremental healthcare costs nearly twice as high as major bleeding, persisting up to 4 years post-event.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: