ArticleVascular medicine (London, England)2025
Healthcare resource utilization and costs after initiating direct-acting oral anticoagulants or low molecular weight heparins in patients with venous thromboembolism.
Article in Vascular medicine (London, England), 2025. 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.
- Economic evaluation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for venous thromboembolism with different etiologies: a systematic review.Health economics review · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) can lead to significant healthcare resource utilization (HcRU) and costs. First-line treatments such as direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) are utilized for VTE management. There are limited observational studies to determine which first-line drug for VTE is associated with lower HcRU and cost. Therefore, we sought to compare HcRU and costs of commercially insured patients with VTE who initiated DOAC or LMWH in the US.
methodsWe utilized Merative MarketScan Research Database (2016-2021) to identify adults initiating DOAC or LMWH for VTE. Baseline measures were assessed 12 months prior to the index date of drug initiation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control confounding. For HcRU, logistic regression was used to model emergency room and inpatient visits and the negative binomial count model was used for outpatient visits. The average marginal effect for total healthcare cost comparing DOAC with LMWH users was estimated using a generalized linear model. HcRU and costs were evaluated for 12 months posttreatment initiation.
resultsDOAC users had lower odds of inpatient visits (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.59), emergency room visits (aOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99), and outpatient visits (adjusted incident rate ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.54) in comparison to LMWH users. DOAC users had lower total healthcare costs of -$9573 (95% CI -$11,149 to -$7997) (US dollars).
conclusionThis cohort study suggests that DOAC use is associated with fewer inpatient, outpatient, and emergency room visits, and lower healthcare costs compared to LMWH use for VTE management.
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.