Why the study?
What are the rates and predictors of suboptimal adherence to oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation?
What are the rates and predictors of suboptimal adherence to oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Self-reported suboptimal adherence to oral anticoagulants is common (45.1%) among Australian patients with atrial fibrillation, particularly in younger and male patients.
Suboptimal OAC adherence in younger male AF patients warrants attention; leaves open targeted interventions for prospective trials.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the proportion of patients who have suboptimal adherence to oral anticoagulant (OAC), identify the predictors of adherence, and determine whether patient-related factors vary across adherence levels in Australia. METHODS: Respondents were recruited for an online survey using Facebook. Survey instruments included the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale, the Anticoagulation Knowledge Tool, the Perception of Anticoagulant Treatment Questionnaires, and a modified Cancer Information Overload scale. Predictors of medication adherence were identified using ordinal regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 386 responses eligible for analysis, only 54.9% reported a high level of adherence. Participants aged 65 years or younger were less likely to have high adherence compared to older participants (odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33-0.88; P = .013), while females were more likely to be highly adherent compared to males (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.08-2.64; P = .023). The analyses showed that age, gender, treatment satisfaction, information overload, concerns about making mistake when taking OACs, and cost of medication were significant predictors of adherence. CONCLUSION: Self-reported suboptimal adherence to OAC is common among patients with atrial fibrillation. A focus on supporting people who are at higher risk of suboptimal adherence is needed to maximize the benefit of OAC therapy in this population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Obamiro et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: