PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
December 1, 2021BMC Health Services Research6 citationsOpen Access

Guideline-discordant dosing of direct-acting oral anticoagulants in the veterans health administration

ARAdam J. RoseJLJong Soo LeeDBDan R. Berlowitz

Key Result

Among VA patients prescribed DOACs for atrial fibrillation, 23% recommended for low-dose therapy received full-dose therapy, and 6% recommended for full-dose received low-dose therapy.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=73,672)

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

P
Population
73,672 predominantly male veterans with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who were prescribed direct-acting oral anticoagulants between 2010 and 2016.
E
Exposure
Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban)
O
Outcome
Proportion of patients receiving guideline-discordant dosing (inappropriate low-dose or inappropriate full-dose)

A substantial portion of DOAC prescriptions for non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the VA system are dosed contrary to clinical guidelines, varying widely across sites.

Limitations

  • Classified patients based on most recent creatinine prior to first DOAC prescription, which may have changed
  • Did not account for concomitant medications requiring DOAC dose adjustments
  • VA population is predominantly male with a high burden of illness, limiting generalizability
  • Study data only extends through 2016

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clear guidelines exist to guide the dosing of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs). It is not known how consistently these guidelines are followed in practice. METHODS: We studied patients from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who received DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) between 2010 and 2016. We used patient characteristics (age, creatinine, body mass) to identify which patients met guideline recommendations for low-dose therapy and which for full-dose therapy. We examined how often patient dosing was concordant with these recommendations. We examined variation in guideline-concordant dosing by site of care and over time. We examined patient-level predictors of guideline-concordant dosing using multivariable logistic models. RESULTS: A total of 73,672 patients who were prescribed DOACS were included. Of 5837 patients who were recommended to receive low-dose therapy, 1331 (23%) received full-dose therapy instead. Of 67,935 patients recommended to receive full-dose therapy, 4079 (6%) received low-dose therapy instead. Sites varied widely on guideline discordant dosing; on inappropriate low-dose therapy, sites varied from 0 to 15%, while on inappropriate high-dose therapy, from 0 to 41%. Guideline discordant therapy decreased by about 20% in a relative sense over time, but its absolute numbers grew as DOAC therapy became more common. The most important patient-level predictors of receiving guideline-discordant therapy were older age and creatinine function being near the cutoff value. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial portion of DOAC prescriptions in the VA system are dosed contrary to clinical guidelines. This phenomenon varies widely across sites of care and has persisted over time.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Rose et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=73,672). Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) was evaluated on Proportion of patients receiving guideline-discordant DOAC dosing. Among VA patients prescribed DOACs for atrial fibrillation, 23% recommended for low-dose therapy received full-dose therapy, and 6% recommended for full-dose received low-dose therapy.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a9fb7a28b5dbbb92fe6197ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07397-x
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper