Key result
Aspirin resulted in similar overall adherence compared to LMWH (mean MMAS 7.0 vs 7.4, p=0.13), though LMWH was associated with higher odds of low-medium adherence (aOR 2.34, 95% CI 1.06-5.18).
Why the study?
Does aspirin improve medication adherence compared to LMWH for VTE prophylaxis in adult orthopedic trauma patients?
RCT (n=150)
randomized
Does aspirin improve medication adherence compared to LMWH for VTE prophylaxis in adult orthopedic trauma patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 7% vs 7.4%
p-value: p=0.13
While overall adherence to VTE prophylaxis after orthopedic trauma is high, LMWH use, self-administration, male sex, and younger age are associated with lower adherence compared to aspirin.
Comparable adherence supports flexible choice of aspirin or LMWH post-trauma; extends RCT data on real-world adherence in orthopedic patients.
BACKGROUND: Orthopedic trauma patients are often treated with venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis with aspirin or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) after discharge from their index admission, but adherence patterns are not known. We hypothesized that overall adherence would be moderate and greater with aspirin compared to LMWH. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial of adult trauma patients with an operative extremity fracture or any pelvic/acetabular fracture requiring VTE prophylaxis. Patients were randomized to receive either LMWH 30 mg BID or aspirin 81 mg BID. Patients prescribed outpatient prophylaxis were contacted between 10 and 21 days after discharge to assess adherence measured by the validated Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8). Adherence scores were compared between the two treatment arms with similar results for intention-to-treat and as-treated analyses. As-treated multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine factors associated with low-medium adherence scores. RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients (64 on LMWH, 86 on aspirin) on chemoprophylaxis at time of follow-up completed the questionnaire. As-treated analysis showed that adherence was high overall (mean MMAS 7.2 out of 8, SD 1.5) and similar for the two regimens (LMWH: 7.4 vs. aspirin: 7.0, p = 0.13). However, patients on LMWH were more likely to feel hassled by their regimen (23% vs. 9%, p = 0.02). In a multivariable model, low-medium adherence was associated with taking LMWH as the prophylaxis medication (aOR 2.34, CI 1.06-5.18, p = 0.04), having to self-administer the prophylaxis (aOR 4.44, CI 1.45-13.61, p < 0.01), being of male sex (aOR 2.46, CI 1.10-5.49, p = 0.03), and of younger age (aOR 0.72 per additional 10 years of age, CI 0.57-0.91, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Overall post-discharge adherence with VTE prophylaxis was high. Several factors, including prophylaxis by LMWH, were associated with decreased adherence. These factors should be considered when managing patients and designing efficacy trials. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level II.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haac et al. (2017) conducted an RCT in Orthopedic trauma requiring VTE prophylaxis (n=150). Aspirin vs. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) 30 mg BID was evaluated on Adherence measured by the validated Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) (p=0.13). Aspirin resulted in similar overall adherence compared to LMWH (mean MMAS 7.0 vs 7.4, p=0.13), though LMWH was associated with higher odds of low-medium adherence (aOR 2.34, 95% CI 1.06-5.18).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: