ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2019
The effect of management models on thromboembolic and bleeding rates in anticoagulated patients: an ecological study.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Telemedicine and decentralized models of care: from anticoagulant monitoring to an expanded concept of vascular medicine.Internal and emergency medicine · 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
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The primary study objective is to compare the outcomes of patients taking oral anticoagulant medications in two distinct populations treated according to different management models (comprehensive vs. usual care). (Design: regional prospective cohort study; setting: hospital admission data from two regions). Eligible partecipants were patients taking oral anticoagulant drugs (vitamin K antagonist or direct oral anticoagulants), residents in the Vicenza and Cremona districts from February 1st, 2016 to June 30th, 2017. Patients were identified by accessing the administrative databases of patient drug prescriptions. The primary study outcome was admission to the Emergency Department for stroke, systemic arterial embolism, recurrence of venous thromboembolism or major bleeding. The study evaluated outcomes in 14,226 patients taking oral anticoagulants, of whom 6725 being followed in Cremona with a comprehensive management model. There were 19 and 45 thromboembolic events over 6205 and 6530 patient-years in the Cremona and Vicenza cohort, respectively (IRR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24-0.77). The reduction of events in the Cremona cohort was almost entirely explained by a decrease of events in patients taking VKA (IRR 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.78) but not DOACs (IRR 1.08, 95% CI 0.25-5.24). The rate of major bleeding was non-significantly higher in Cremona than in Vicenza (IRI 1.32; 95% CI 0.74-2.40). Across the two cohorts, the risk of bleeding was lower in patients being treated with DOACs rather than warfarin (10/4574 vs. 42/8161 event/person-years, respectively, IRR 0.42 95% CI 0.19-0.86). We conclude that a comprehensive management model providing centralized dose prescription and follow-up may significantly reduce the rate of thromboembolic complications, without substantially increasing the number of bleeding complications. Patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants appear to have a rate of thromboembolic complications comparable to VKA patients under the best management model, with a reduction of major bleeding.
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.