Why the study?
Optimal thromboprophylaxis in AF requires accurate application of modern guidelines, prompting evaluation of the point prevalence and factors associated with nonguideline-directed anticoagulation and DOAC dosing.
What is the prevalence and what are the predictors of nonguideline-directed anticoagulation and discordant DOAC dosing in Canadian patients with atrial fibrillation?
What is the prevalence and what are the predictors of nonguideline-directed anticoagulation and discordant DOAC dosing in Canadian patients with atrial fibrillation?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A significant proportion of Canadian AF patients receive nonguideline-directed anticoagulation (11%) or discordant DOAC dosing (32%), highlighting a gap in optimal thromboprophylaxis.
Background: Optimal thromboprophylaxis in atrial fibrillation (AF) requires the accurate application of modern clinical guidelines. We evaluated the point prevalence and factors associated with nonguideline-directed anticoagulation and direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing in Canadian patients with AF. Methods: TRANSECT-AF is a retrospective registry of consecutive Canadian patients with AF collected between March 2021 and August 2023. Patients were categorized as guideline directed therapy (GDT) or nonguideline-directed therapy (NGDT) based on concordance of their reported thromboprophylaxis with the CHADS-65 algorithm. Patients on GDT with a DOAC were subcategorized as concordant or discordant dosing based on concordance of their reported DOAC doses with the 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society AF dosing recommendations. Results: In total, 3043 patients were included (median age 77, 37% women, median CHADS-VASc score 4, median HAS-BLED score 2) and 11% received NGDT, which was independently associated with younger age, lower thromboembolic risk, better renal function, and antiplatelet therapy. Within the GDT cohort, 32% of patients were on guideline discordant DOAC doses. Older age, lower body mass index, female sex, lower renal function, higher thromboembolic risk and non-apixaban DOAC use were independently associated with discordant dosing. Conclusions: Within this Canadian AF registry, 11% of patients were on NGDT and 32% of patients on GDT with a DOAC were treated with a guideline-discordant dose. Our analysis describes predictors of guideline discordant anticoagulation and DOAC dosing that may be used to identify target populations for future quality improvement initiatives in AF thromboprophylaxis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Clifford et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: