Why the study?
What are the rates and predictors of oral anticoagulant initiation and adherence in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in China?
What are the rates and predictors of oral anticoagulant initiation and adherence in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in China?
Oral anticoagulation is significantly underused and has poor adherence among NVAF patients in China, highlighting a major gap in stroke prevention.
Indicates substantial warfarin underuse in Chinese NVAF patients; hypothesis-generating for adherence interventions and risk-stratified prescribing.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Adherence to oral anticoagulants is crucial for the prevention of ischemic stroke in atrial fibrillation patients; however, evidence of oral-anticoagulant adherence from developing countries is still lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the current situation and predictors of oral-anticoagulant adherence in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients in China. METHODS: Records of NVAF patients were obtained from a regional claims database. Both initiation and adherence to oral anticoagulants were calculated from linked records. Factors of oral-anticoagulant initiation were identified using Cox regression. Among patients who initialized warfarin, only 40.4% filled the first repeat prescription within 3 months. Concurrent statin use, hypertension and heart failure were associated with higher warfarin initiation rate. Factors such as age above 75, female sex, manufacture workers, discharge from the primary-care center, antiplatelet use, and diabetes, ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke were associated with lower rate of warfarin initiation. Additionally, initiating warfarin treatment reduced risk of ischemic stroke in middle and high-risk patients. CONCLUSION: Oral anticoagulation was significantly under-used in NVAF patients in China. Age, sex, concurrent drug usage, and disease history were associated factors. Improving warfarin adherence was promising to reduce ischemic stroke risk of NVAF patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xiang et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: