Key result
Direct oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists showed conflicting findings for treatment adherence and quality of life in non-valvular atrial fibrillation due to high study heterogeneity.
Why the study?
DOACs and VKAs differ in pharmacokinetic characteristics, required monitoring intensity, and costs, which could affect treatment adherence and quality of life in non-valvular AF.
Systematic Review (n=122,458)
Absolute Event Rate: 71.6% vs 62.8%
Evidence remains inconclusive on adherence or QoL differences; leaves open whether DOACs improve these outcomes versus VKAs in AF.
Background Direct anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) differ in pharmacokinetic characteristics, intensity of required laboratory monitoring, and costs. These differences could affect patients’ adherence to treatment and quality of life (QoL). Objective To assess whether patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) using DOACs have better treatment adherence and QoL when compared to patients using VKAs. Methods We conducted a systematic review in Medline, Embase, LILACS, SciELO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central, until June 9, 2021. We included studies [...]
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zortéa et al. (2023) conducted a systematic review in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=122,458). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) was evaluated on Treatment adherence. Direct oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists showed conflicting findings for treatment adherence and quality of life in non-valvular atrial fibrillation due to high study heterogeneity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: