Observational studyBMC cardiovascular disorders2021
Demographic, clinical, and functional determinants of antithrombotic treatment in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.
Observational study in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2021. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Study Design of a Brazilian Observational Study of Edoxaban in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (EdoBRA).Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study assessed the sociodemographic, functional, and clinical determinants of antithrombotic treatment in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) attended in the internal medicine setting.
methodsA multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted in NVAF patients who attended internal medicine departments for either a routine visit (outpatients) or hospitalization (inpatients).
resultsA total of 961 patients were evaluated. Their antithrombotic management included: no treatment (4.7%), vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) (59.6%), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (21.6%), antiplatelets (6.6%), and antiplatelets plus anticoagulants (7.5%). Permanent NVAF and congestive heart failure were associated with preferential use of oral anticoagulation over antiplatelets, while intermediate-to high-mortality risk according to the PROFUND index was associated with a higher likelihood of using antiplatelet therapy instead of oral anticoagulation. Longer disease duration and institutionalization were identified as determinants of VKA use over DOACs. Female gender, higher education, and having suffered a stroke determined a preferential use of DOACs.
conclusionsThis real-world study showed that most elderly NVAF patients received oral anticoagulation, mainly VKAs, while DOACs remained underused. Antiplatelets were still offered to a proportion of patients. Longer duration of NVAF and institutionalization were identified as determinants of VKA use over DOACs. A poor prognosis according to the PROFUND index was identified as a factor preventing the use of oral anticoagulation.
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.