ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2020
Quality of clinical direct oral anticoagulant prescribing and identification of risk factors for inappropriate prescriptions.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Overview of Anticoagulant Drugs Pharmacology, Therapeutic Approaches, Limitations and Perspectives.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Exploring the pharmacists' role in optimising antithrombotic therapy in primary care: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Prolonged Secondary Stroke Prevention with Edoxaban: A Long-Term Follow-Up of the SATES Study.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation treated with direct oral anticoagulants and new insights into inappropriate dosing: results from the French National Prospective Registry: PAFF.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023Article
- Anticoagulation stewardship: Descriptive analysis of a novel approach to appropriate anticoagulant prescription.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022Article
- Choice of oral anticoagulant prescribed by general practices in Wales: Application of Dirichlet regression and linked data.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Article
- Appropriateness of inpatient dosing of direct oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2022Article
- Quality of clinical direct oral anticoagulant prescribing and identification of risk factors for inappropriate prescriptions.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsEven though the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is safe based on clinical outcomes, drug safety also depends on appropriateness of drug prescription, which is challenging for DOACs since many patient factors need to be considered. The aim of this study was to assess the appropriateness of DOAC prescriptions and to identify risk factors of determinants for inappropriate DOAC prescriptions.
methodsA retrospective study in a nonuniversity teaching hospital was performed of hospitalized patients (≥18 years) who received an initial DOAC prescription between February and August 2018. Appropriateness of prescribing was evaluated on 8 criteria by using a modified version of the medication appropriateness index.
resultsA total of 770 initial DOAC prescriptions of inpatients were evaluated: 267 patients (34.6%) had at least met 1 inappropriate criterion for a DOAC prescription. The most frequent inappropriate criterion was dosage (17.4%). Of the 4 DOACs, dabigatran (21.6%) and apixaban (21.2%) were mostly inappropriate dosed. In a multivariable analysis, reduced renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate <50 mL/min; odds ratio [OR] = 2.35; P < .001), a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (OR = 1.87; P = .004), and 'prescribed by surgeons' (OR = 1.9; P = .013) were independently associated with inappropriateness of prescribing.
conclusionThis study has highlighted a high degree of inappropriate prescribing of DOACs. These results underline the need for targeted interventions to improve DOAC prescribing.
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.