ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2019
Hospitalization period and direct medical cost in patients using warfarin or novel oral anti-coagulants after a cerebral embolism.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs. Vitamin-K Antagonists in the Elderly With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review Comparing Benefits and Harms Between Observational Studies and Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Analysis of the Introduction in Clinical Practice of New Oral Anticoagulants in Local Health Agency BT: Translation of the Clinical Trial Data to a Local Health Care Area.Pharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Protocol for AREST: Apixaban for Early Prevention of Recurrent Embolic Stroke and Hemorrhagic Transformation-A Randomized Controlled Trial of Early Anticoagulation After Acute Ischemic Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Warfarin has been used in Japan for a long time in patients after cerebral embolism to prevent recurrence. Recently, several novel oral anti-coagulants (NOACs) have been approved for use and are gradually replacing warfarin. However, it remains unclear whether warfarin and other NOACs differ from each other with respect to drug costs and length of stay (LOS) during treatment in Japan. Objective To assess differences in LOS and direct medical cost between patients after cerebral embolism treated with warfarin and those treated with NOACs. Setting Thirteen acute care hospitals in Japan. Method For hospitalized patients with cerebral embolisms who were treated with NOACs and/or warfarin between April 2012 and March 2014, we assessed LOS for patients with warfarin and NOAC using log-rank test, and stratified proportional hazard regression. Also, we assess direct medical cost using paired-t test. Main Outcome measure LOS and medical cost after first treatment with warfarin and NOAC. Results The median LOS for NOACs-treated patients was 12.5 days and that for warfarin treated patients was 19.0 days while the corresponding mean medical costs were USD 7151 ± 6228 [JPY 736,546 ± 641,437] and USD 8950 ± 5891 [JPY 921,830 ± 606,765]. The drug cost for NOACs-treated patients was higher but costs for laboratory-test and hospitalization were lower than those for warfarin-treated patients. Conclusions For NOAC-treated patients, LOS was shorter, and medical cost during hospitalization tended to be lower than those for warfarin-treated patients, whereas NOACs prices were higher than warfarin price.
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.