Why the study?
Does warfarin self-management improve time in therapeutic range and quality of life in patients requiring chronic anticoagulation compared to conventional management?
Does warfarin self-management improve time in therapeutic range and quality of life in patients requiring chronic anticoagulation compared to conventional management?
Patient self-management of warfarin therapy can significantly improve time in therapeutic range and quality of life in selected patients, though widespread implementation may be limited by training requirements and attrition.
The landscape of oral anticoagulant therapy has significantly changed over the last decade with non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) now preferred over conventional vitamin K oral anticoagulants (VKAs), such as warfarin, for a large proportion of patients requiring chronic anticoagulation.[1] All NOACs have shown a favourable risk/benefit profile compared with warfarin, with significant reductions in intracranial haemorrhage, stroke and systemic embolism.[2] Their predictable anticoagulant effect without the need for routine monitoring is another attribute which makes them an attractive choice. Nevertheless, warfarin remains a useful drug as many patients requiring OAC have contraindications to NOAC therapy, such as mechanical valve replacement, antiphospholipid syndrome or severely reduced renal function, and globally the NOACs are not always a viable option (either availability to prescribe and/or cost) for many patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ritchie et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: