Why the study?
The study was conducted to examine nonvalvular AF patients' preferences regarding oral anticoagulation characteristics and investigate differences across 5 different countries.
What are the preferences of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation regarding oral anticoagulation characteristics across different countries?
What are the preferences of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation regarding oral anticoagulation characteristics across different countries?
Patients with atrial fibrillation prefer oral anticoagulants with fewer monitoring and dietary restrictions, though the relative importance of these attributes varies significantly by country.
The aim of this study was to examine atrial fibrillation (AF) patients' preferences regarding oral anticoagulation (OAC) characteristics and to investigate differences across 5 different countries. A multicenter discrete choice experiment was conducted in Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Spain, and Taiwan. Study sites enrolled patients with nonvalvular AF who received continuous OAC therapy. The discrete choice experiment design considered the following 4 attributes with 2 attribute levels each: need for bridging (yes/no), interactions with food/alcohol (yes/no), need for regular international normalized ratio (INR) assessments, and frequency of intake (once/twice daily). Generally, patients (n = 1391) preferred treatment alternatives that were characterized by "no need of bridging," "no need for regular INR controls," "no interactions with food/alcohol," and "once daily intake." For this desired treatment regimen, patients were willing to accept a substantially higher travel distance/time. German patients with AF were strongly impacted in their hypothetical treatment decision by the frequency of intake (37.5%). Swedish patients on the other hand gave little importance to intake frequency (12.6%). In Switzerland, patients were especially concerned with food/alcohol interactions of the medication (34.7%), whereas this was the least important attribute for Taiwanese patients (18.9%), who ascribed the most homogenous importance to the different treatment attributes overall. In Spain, the need for regular INR assessments especially impacted the patient's treatment decision (31.9%). Patients of all countries attributed a moderate importance to the need for bridging (25.9%-34.2%). These findings may facilitate country-specific consideration of patients' preferences regarding OAC therapy, potentially increasing treatment acceptance on the patient's side with the ultimate goal of improving treatment adherence and persistence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Henry et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: