Observational studyDrugs & aging2016
A Comparison of Oral Anticoagulant Use for Atrial Fibrillation in the Pre- and Post-DOAC Eras.
Observational study in Drugs & aging, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patients' and clinicians' perceptions of oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a systematic narrative review and meta-analysis.BMC family practice · 2021Pooled it
- Warfarin monitoring in nursing homes assessed by case histories. Do recommendations and electronic alerts affect judgements?Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2017Trial
- Clinical Characteristics, Patterns of Use, and incidence of Adverse Events in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Treated With Oral Anticoagulants in Colombia.Vascular health and risk management · 2023Article
- Trends in Uptake and Adherence to Oral Anticoagulation for Patients With Incident Atrial Fibrillation at High Stroke Risk Across Health Care Settings.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Article
- Social Inequalities of Oral Anticoagulation after the Introduction of Non-Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.Korean circulation journal · 2020Article
- Direct oral anticoagulants uptake and an oral anticoagulation paradox.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Article
- Article
- Real-world adherence for direct oral anticoagulants in a newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation cohort: does the dosing interval matter?BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2019Article
- Risk factors for stroke and choice of oral anticoagulant in atrial fibrillation.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
- Patterns of direct oral anticoagulant drug prescription in France in 2010-2013: a study in the Midi-Pyrénées area.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
- Observational
- Underuse of Anticoagulation in Older Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and CHADSDrugs & aging · 2017Article
- Adherence to Rivaroxaban, Dabigatran, and Apixaban for Stroke Prevention for Newly Diagnosed and Treatment-Naive Atrial Fibrillation Patients: An Update Using 2013-2014 Data.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2017Observational
- Switching to Another Oral Anticoagulant and Drug Discontinuation Among Elderly Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Treated With Different Direct Oral Anticoagulants.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
- Supratherapeutic dabigatran: a cause of life-threatening haemorrhage.Anaesthesia reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have seen rapid uptake for the prevention of stroke associated with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). It is unclear whether use of DOACs represents direct therapeutic substitution over warfarin or if this coincides with an increase in overall treatment rates. This study sought to describe the difference in oral anticoagulant (OAC) use in the pre-DOAC and post-DOAC eras.
methodsIncident cases of NVAF were identified from the Truven Marketscan database during the years 2005-2009 ('pre-DOAC') and 2013 ('post-DOAC'). Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared for the overall cohorts and among those who did and did not receive OAC in both time periods. OAC treatment was observed by stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc) and bleed risk (HAS-BLED) scores. Logistic regression was used to compare the individual characteristics associated with OAC use between the study periods.
resultsDuring the pre- and post-DOAC eras, 105,610 and 11,992 NVAF patients were identified. OAC treatment increased from 42.2 to 54.0 % (absolute change 11.8 %, relative change 28.0 %) from the pre- to post-DOAC periods without meaningful differences between the populations. Larger relative increases in OAC treatment were observed for those at high risk of stroke (33.9 % increase) and for those with moderate (30.4 % increase) to high risk (28.6 % increase) of bleed. Other than time period of diagnosis, no patient characteristics differed between those treated with OACs in the pre and post periods.
conclusionsThere has been an overall increase in OAC use in the NVAF population, attributable to both favorable randomized trial results and aggressive marketing of DOACs in the USA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.