ArticlePreventive medicine reports2022
Preferences for and use of oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation under real-world conditions in Germany: A survey among physicians.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prescribing Vitamin-K-Antagonists Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants Among Bavarian General Practitioners: A Qualitative Study.Health services insights · 2025Article
- Improving multidisciplinary hospital care for acute cerebral circulation disorders in Kazakhstan.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Review
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Germany, there is little real-world evidence on physicians' choice of oral anticoagulants (OACs). Our study aimed at assessing preferences for and prescribing patterns of treatment options for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation in clinical practice in Germany. We conducted a nationwide quantitative online survey among office-based physicians in Germany. Physicians were asked about their preference for and use of treatment options as well as factors influencing their choice of a specific OAC. A total of n = 953 physicians was surveyed in September and October 2020 (general physicians: 36.0%; internists: 37.3%; cardiologists: 23.7%; neurologists: 10.5%; multiple specialties possible). Preference and use were highest for non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs); followed by vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Most preferred OACs were apixaban (39.3%), rivaroxaban (28.5%) and edoxaban (14.7%). Most used OACs were apixaban (24.3%), rivaroxaban (21.2%) and phenprocoumon (21.4%). NOACs were preferred more often than used (85.6% > 68.6%). VKAs were preferred less often than used (9.6% < 23.5%). OAC attributes and patient characteristics related to efficacy and safety, as well as patients' kidney function were most important when selecting a specific OAC. Federal and regional governance instruments likely influenced treatment decision-making. We found a high divergence between preferences for and use of available treatment options in clinical practice. Further exploration of the importance of OAC attributes, patient characteristics as well as federal and regional governance instruments for physicians' choice of a specific OAC may help to further optimize the healthcare of patients with atrial fibrillation in the long-term.
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.