ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Direct Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Individuals Aged 80 Years and Older: An Overview in 2021.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risks of oral anticoagulants: Analysis of adverse drug reactions reported to the Portuguese National Pharmacovigilance System.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two main types of oral anticoagulants are available in France: vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and, more recently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). The benefit−risk profile appears to be favorable for DOAC, which is as effective as VKA but safer (fewer cases of severe and cerebral bleeding). In a study in 2017, we observed that older adults did not seem to receive the same modalities of oral anticoagulants as younger individuals for various reasons. To assess anticoagulation prescribing practices over time, we repeated this cross-sectional study by comparing very old individuals taking DOAC to those taking VKA. Ambulatory individuals aged 80 years and older were included. They were affiliated with the Mutualité Sociale Agricole of Burgundy and were refunded for a medical prescription of oral anticoagulation in March 2021. The demographic characteristics, registered chronic diseases (RCD), number and types of prescribed drugs, and mortality of the DOAC group and the VKA group were compared. A total of 4275 subjects were included in the study: 67.44% (2883) received DOAC and 32.56% (1392) received VKA. The two groups were similar in age. In the DOAC group, there were more women (54.98% vs. 46.98%) (p < 0.001), fewer RCD (91.47% vs. 93.68%) (p = 0.014), and lower rates of venous thromboembolism (2.53% vs. 6.75%) (p < 0.001), severe heart failure (56.50% vs. 68.03%) (p < 0.001), and severe kidney diseases (1.38% vs. 3.59%) (p < 0.001), but there were more subjects with Alzheimer’s disease (7.49% vs. 4.31%) (p = 0.001). Individuals in the DOAC group had fewer prescriptions of furosemide (48.53% vs. 55.75%) (p < 0.001) and fibrates (2.32% vs. 3.88%) (p = 0.044). They also had more prescriptions of proton pump inhibitors (43.95% vs. 39.44%) (p = 0.006) and antirheumatics (1.60% vs. 0.65%) (p = 0.009) than those in the VKA group. There was no difference in mortality. This study revealed that prescribing practices for DOAC have changed over time.
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.