Key result
DOACs are linked to ~5-point higher treatment satisfaction versus warfarin without quality-of-life differences.
Why the study?
Quality of life on long-term oral anticoagulation has received increasing attention due to rising life expectancy, prompting comparison between warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants.
Does DOAC improve quality of life and treatment satisfaction compared to warfarin in patients with NVAF or VTE?
Cross-Sectional (n=208)
No
Does DOAC improve quality of life and treatment satisfaction compared to warfarin in patients with NVAF or VTE?
DOACs offer comparable quality of life but higher treatment satisfaction and lower hospitalization rates compared to warfarin in patients with NVAF or VTE.
Supports higher satisfaction with DOACs but should not change practice; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
Introduction and aim: Patient quality of life (QOL) while on long-term oral anticoagulant therapy has been receiving greater attention in recent years due to the increase in life expectancy brought about by advances in medical care. This study aimed to compare the QOL, treatment satisfaction, hospitalization and bleeding rate in patients on long-term warfarin versus direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) on long-term anticoagulant therapy attending the cardiology clinic and anticoagulation clinic of the University Malaya Medical Centre from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2018. Patient QOL was assessed by using the Short Form 12 Health Survey (SF12), while treatment satisfaction was assessed by using the Perception of Anticoagulation Treatment Questionnaire 2 (PACT-Q2). Results: A total of 208 patients were recruited; 52.4% received warfarin and 47.6% received DOAC. There was no significant difference in QOL between warfarin and DOAC based on SF12 (physical QOL, P =0.083; mental QOL, P =0.665). Nevertheless, patients in the DOAC group were significantly more satisfied with their treatment compared to the warfarin group based on PACT-Q2 ( P =0.004). The hospitalisation rate was significantly higher in the warfarin group than the DOAC group (15.6% versus 3.0%, P =0.002). Clinically relevant minor bleeds and severe bleeding events were non-significantly higher in the warfarin group than the DOAC group (66.7% versus 40.0%, P =0.069). Conclusion: Compared to warfarin, treatment of NVAF and VTE with DOAC showed comparable QOL, higher treatment satisfaction, lesser hospitalization, and a non-significant trend toward fewer bleeding episodes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ng et al. (2019) conducted a cross-sectional in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) (n=208). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) vs. Warfarin was evaluated on Anticoagulant treatment satisfaction score (PACT-Q2) (p=0.004). Patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants reported significantly higher overall treatment satisfaction compared to those on warfarin, though quality of life scores were not significantly different.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: