Key result
Only ~52% of high-risk non-valvular AF patients receive guideline-directed oral anticoagulation.
Why the study?
There is a need to reassess contemporary oral anticoagulation trends and barriers against guideline-directed therapy in non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the United States during the DOAC predominant era.
Cohort (n=339,197)
Yes
Despite guideline recommendations favoring DOACs, there remains significant underutilization of OAC in high-risk AF patients and overutilization in low-risk patients, highlighting gaps in real-world stroke prevention.
Real-world OAC patterns in AF deviate from guidelines; extends prior underutilization data and leaves open effects of targeted interventions.
There is a need to reassess contemporary oral anticoagulation (OAC) trends and barriers against guideline directed therapy in the United States. Most previous studies were performed before major guideline changes recommended direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use over warfarin or have otherwise lacked patient level data. Data on overuse of OAC in low-risk group is also limited. To address these knowledge gaps, we performed a nationwide analysis to analyze current trends. This is a retrospective cohort study assessing non-valvular AF identified using a large United States de-identified administrative claims database, including commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees. Prescription fills were assessed within a 90-day follow-up from the patient’s index AF encounter between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020. Among the 339,197 AF patients, 4.4%, 8.0%, and 87.6% were in the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups (according to CHA2DS2-VASc score). An over (29.6%) and under (52.2%) utilization of OAC was reported in low- and high-risk AF patients. A considerably high frequency for warfarin use was also noted among high-risk group patients taking OAC (33.1%). The results suggest that anticoagulation use for stroke prevention in the United States is still comparable to the pre-DOAC era studies. About half of newly diagnosed high-risk non-valvular AF patients remain unprotected against stroke risk. Several predictors of OAC and DOAC use were also identified. Our findings may identify a population at risk of complications due to under- or over-treatment and highlight the need for future quality improvement efforts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sehrawat et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=339,197). Oral anticoagulation (OAC) vs. No OAC was evaluated on OAC prescription fills within 90 days of index AF diagnosis. Oral anticoagulation was underutilized in high-risk (52.2%) and overutilized in low-risk (29.6%) non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients, with warfarin making up 33.1% of high-risk prescriptions.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: