ArticlePharmacotherapy2026
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Patient Self-Management of Warfarin Among Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in Pharmacotherapy, 2026. 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.
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
Abstract
backgroundPatient self-management (PSM) is a warfarin management strategy that allows patients to independently adjust their doses. PSM significantly reduces thrombosis events and has been widely implemented internationally. However, adoption of PSM is limited in the United States. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of PSM compared with available strategies, including anticoagulation management services (AMS) and usual care (UC) for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) aged 70 years and older in the United States.
methodsA cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to estimate lifetime costs and outcomes of PSM compared with AMS and UC employing a Markov model. The model simulated a 70-year-old with NVAF over the patient's lifetime from modified societal and payer perspectives. Transition probabilities were derived from annual event rates reported in the ARISTOTLE trial. Comparative efficacy and safety among the interventions were obtained from a network meta-analysis. Costs, presented in 2024 US dollars (USD), and utility data were obtained from data sources in the United States. A discount rate of 3% was applied for future costs and outcomes. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the robustness of the findings.
resultsThe lifetime costs from the modified societal perspective were $137,509 USD for UC, $129,216 USD for AMS, and $76,515 USD for PSM. Discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated to be 8.27 for UC, 8.30 for AMS, and 8.47 for PSM. Additionally, PSM substantially reduced stroke incidence compared with AMS and UC, contributing to lower costs and greater QALYs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that PSM appeared to be the most cost-effective at any willingness-to-pay threshold.
conclusionsPSM is the most cost-effective strategy for managing warfarin in the target population at any willingness-to-pay threshold. Implementation of PSM in the US health care setting should be considered.
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.