Loading…

Association of Direct Oral Anticoagulation Management Strategies With Clinical Outcomes for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation

Anticoagulation management services (AMSs; ie, warfarin clinics) have evolved to include patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), but it is unknown whether DOAC therapy management services improve outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). To compare outcomes associated wi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:JAMA network open 2023-07, Vol.6 (7), p.e2321971
Main Authors: Derington, Catherine G, Goodrich, Glenn K, Xu, Stanley, Clark, Nathan P, Reynolds, Kristi, An, Jaejin, Witt, Daniel M, Smith, David H, O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen, Lang, Daniel T, Ho, P Michael, Cheetham, T Craig, Comer, Angela C, King, Jordan B
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c398t-35077b953284da43d6a03ed0073293f160884b6086f67306ccb8535c279b2fef3
container_end_page
container_issue 7
container_start_page e2321971
container_title JAMA network open
container_volume 6
creator Derington, Catherine G
Goodrich, Glenn K
Xu, Stanley
Clark, Nathan P
Reynolds, Kristi
An, Jaejin
Witt, Daniel M
Smith, David H
O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen
Lang, Daniel T
Ho, P Michael
Cheetham, T Craig
Comer, Angela C
King, Jordan B
description Anticoagulation management services (AMSs; ie, warfarin clinics) have evolved to include patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), but it is unknown whether DOAC therapy management services improve outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). To compare outcomes associated with 3 DOAC care models for preventing adverse anticoagulation-related outcomes among patients with AF. This retrospective cohort study included 44 746 adult patients with a diagnosis of AF who initiated oral anticoagulation (DOAC or warfarin) between August 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, in 3 Kaiser Permanente (KP) regions. Statistical analysis was conducted from August 2021 through May 2023. Each KP region used an AMS to manage warfarin but used distinct approaches to DOAC care: (1) usual care (UC) by the prescribing clinician, (2) UC plus an automated population management tool (PMT), or (3) pharmacist-managed AMS care. Propensity scores and inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) were estimated. Direct oral anticoagulant care models were first indirectly compared using warfarin as a common comparator within each region and then directly compared across regions. Patients were followed up until the first occurrence of an outcome (composite of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, other major bleeding, or death), discontinuation of KP membership, or December 31, 2020. Overall, 44 746 patients were included: 6182 in the UC care model (3297 DOAC; 2885 warfarin), 33 625 in the UC plus PMT care model (21 891 DOAC; 11 734 warfarin), and 4939 in the AMS care model (2089 DOAC; 2850 warfarin). Baseline characteristics (mean [SD] age, 73.1 [10.6] years, 56.1% male, 67.2% non-Hispanic White, median CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, female sex] score of 3 [IQR, 2-5]) were well balanced after IPTW. Over a median follow-up of 2 years, patients who received the UC plus PMT or AMS care model did not have significantly better outcomes than those who received UC. The incidence rate of the composite outcome was 5.4% per year for DOAC and 9.1% per year for warfarin for those in the UC group, 6.1% per year for DOAC and 10.5% per year for those in the UC plus PMT group, and 5.1% per year for DOAC and 8.0% per year for those in the AMS group. The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the composite outcome comparing DOAC vs warfarin were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.05) in the UC group,
doi_str_mv 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.21971
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10326649</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2843526559</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c398t-35077b953284da43d6a03ed0073293f160884b6086f67306ccb8535c279b2fef3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdUV1vFCEUJUZjm9q_YCb64suuwB0Y8MVMVqtN2uyDGh8JwzBb1hlYgdEY_7ysu23avlxuOB-5JwehVwQvCcbk7VZP2tv8O8QfYWf9kmIKS0pkQ56gU8qaegECs6f39hN0ntIWY0wxAcnZc3QCTU1wzckp-tumFIzT2QVfhaH64KI1uVpHPVatz84EvZnHA3ytvd7YyfpcfclRZ7txNlXfXb6pVqPzzhTNes4mTOV7CLFq-3nMR0aboyv4heuiGw-GL9CzQY_Jnh_fM_Tt4uPX1efF1frT5aq9WhiQIi-A4abpJAMq6l7X0HONwfYYN0AlDIRjIequTD7wBjA3phMMmKGN7OhgBzhD7w--u7mbbG9KgBJP7aKbdPyjgnbqIeLdjdqEX4pgoJzXsji8OTrE8HO2KavJJWNLDm_DnBQVAFIKwUShvn5E3YY5-pKvsGpglDO2N3x3YJkYUop2uLuGYLXvWT3qWe17Vv97LuKX9_PcSW9bhX_Ms6qY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2843526559</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Association of Direct Oral Anticoagulation Management Strategies With Clinical Outcomes for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Derington, Catherine G ; Goodrich, Glenn K ; Xu, Stanley ; Clark, Nathan P ; Reynolds, Kristi ; An, Jaejin ; Witt, Daniel M ; Smith, David H ; O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen ; Lang, Daniel T ; Ho, P Michael ; Cheetham, T Craig ; Comer, Angela C ; King, Jordan B</creator><creatorcontrib>Derington, Catherine G ; Goodrich, Glenn K ; Xu, Stanley ; Clark, Nathan P ; Reynolds, Kristi ; An, Jaejin ; Witt, Daniel M ; Smith, David H ; O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen ; Lang, Daniel T ; Ho, P Michael ; Cheetham, T Craig ; Comer, Angela C ; King, Jordan B</creatorcontrib><description>Anticoagulation management services (AMSs; ie, warfarin clinics) have evolved to include patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), but it is unknown whether DOAC therapy management services improve outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). To compare outcomes associated with 3 DOAC care models for preventing adverse anticoagulation-related outcomes among patients with AF. This retrospective cohort study included 44 746 adult patients with a diagnosis of AF who initiated oral anticoagulation (DOAC or warfarin) between August 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, in 3 Kaiser Permanente (KP) regions. Statistical analysis was conducted from August 2021 through May 2023. Each KP region used an AMS to manage warfarin but used distinct approaches to DOAC care: (1) usual care (UC) by the prescribing clinician, (2) UC plus an automated population management tool (PMT), or (3) pharmacist-managed AMS care. Propensity scores and inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) were estimated. Direct oral anticoagulant care models were first indirectly compared using warfarin as a common comparator within each region and then directly compared across regions. Patients were followed up until the first occurrence of an outcome (composite of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, other major bleeding, or death), discontinuation of KP membership, or December 31, 2020. Overall, 44 746 patients were included: 6182 in the UC care model (3297 DOAC; 2885 warfarin), 33 625 in the UC plus PMT care model (21 891 DOAC; 11 734 warfarin), and 4939 in the AMS care model (2089 DOAC; 2850 warfarin). Baseline characteristics (mean [SD] age, 73.1 [10.6] years, 56.1% male, 67.2% non-Hispanic White, median CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, female sex] score of 3 [IQR, 2-5]) were well balanced after IPTW. Over a median follow-up of 2 years, patients who received the UC plus PMT or AMS care model did not have significantly better outcomes than those who received UC. The incidence rate of the composite outcome was 5.4% per year for DOAC and 9.1% per year for warfarin for those in the UC group, 6.1% per year for DOAC and 10.5% per year for those in the UC plus PMT group, and 5.1% per year for DOAC and 8.0% per year for those in the AMS group. The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the composite outcome comparing DOAC vs warfarin were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.05) in the UC group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.79-0.90) in the UC plus PMT group, and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.72-0.99) in the AMS group (P = .62 for heterogeneity across care models). When directly comparing patients receiving DOAC, the IPTW-adjusted HR was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.85-1.34) for the UC plus PMT group vs the UC group and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71-1.02) for the AMS group vs the UC group. This cohort study did not find appreciably better outcomes for patients receiving DOAC who were managed by either a UC plus PMT or AMS care model compared with UC.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2574-3805</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2574-3805</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.21971</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37410461</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Medical Association</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Anticoagulants ; Anticoagulants - adverse effects ; Atrial Fibrillation - complications ; Atrial Fibrillation - diagnosis ; Atrial Fibrillation - drug therapy ; Capitation ; Cardiac arrhythmia ; Cardiology ; Clinical outcomes ; Cohort analysis ; Cohort Studies ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Online Only ; Original Investigation ; Retrospective Studies ; Stroke - diagnosis ; Stroke - etiology ; Stroke - prevention &amp; control ; Warfarin - adverse effects</subject><ispartof>JAMA network open, 2023-07, Vol.6 (7), p.e2321971</ispartof><rights>2023. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Copyright 2023 Derington CG et al. .</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c398t-35077b953284da43d6a03ed0073293f160884b6086f67306ccb8535c279b2fef3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2843526559?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37410461$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Derington, Catherine G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goodrich, Glenn K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Stanley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clark, Nathan P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reynolds, Kristi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>An, Jaejin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Witt, Daniel M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, David H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lang, Daniel T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ho, P Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheetham, T Craig</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Comer, Angela C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>King, Jordan B</creatorcontrib><title>Association of Direct Oral Anticoagulation Management Strategies With Clinical Outcomes for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation</title><title>JAMA network open</title><addtitle>JAMA Netw Open</addtitle><description>Anticoagulation management services (AMSs; ie, warfarin clinics) have evolved to include patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), but it is unknown whether DOAC therapy management services improve outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). To compare outcomes associated with 3 DOAC care models for preventing adverse anticoagulation-related outcomes among patients with AF. This retrospective cohort study included 44 746 adult patients with a diagnosis of AF who initiated oral anticoagulation (DOAC or warfarin) between August 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, in 3 Kaiser Permanente (KP) regions. Statistical analysis was conducted from August 2021 through May 2023. Each KP region used an AMS to manage warfarin but used distinct approaches to DOAC care: (1) usual care (UC) by the prescribing clinician, (2) UC plus an automated population management tool (PMT), or (3) pharmacist-managed AMS care. Propensity scores and inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) were estimated. Direct oral anticoagulant care models were first indirectly compared using warfarin as a common comparator within each region and then directly compared across regions. Patients were followed up until the first occurrence of an outcome (composite of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, other major bleeding, or death), discontinuation of KP membership, or December 31, 2020. Overall, 44 746 patients were included: 6182 in the UC care model (3297 DOAC; 2885 warfarin), 33 625 in the UC plus PMT care model (21 891 DOAC; 11 734 warfarin), and 4939 in the AMS care model (2089 DOAC; 2850 warfarin). Baseline characteristics (mean [SD] age, 73.1 [10.6] years, 56.1% male, 67.2% non-Hispanic White, median CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, female sex] score of 3 [IQR, 2-5]) were well balanced after IPTW. Over a median follow-up of 2 years, patients who received the UC plus PMT or AMS care model did not have significantly better outcomes than those who received UC. The incidence rate of the composite outcome was 5.4% per year for DOAC and 9.1% per year for warfarin for those in the UC group, 6.1% per year for DOAC and 10.5% per year for those in the UC plus PMT group, and 5.1% per year for DOAC and 8.0% per year for those in the AMS group. The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the composite outcome comparing DOAC vs warfarin were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.05) in the UC group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.79-0.90) in the UC plus PMT group, and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.72-0.99) in the AMS group (P = .62 for heterogeneity across care models). When directly comparing patients receiving DOAC, the IPTW-adjusted HR was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.85-1.34) for the UC plus PMT group vs the UC group and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71-1.02) for the AMS group vs the UC group. This cohort study did not find appreciably better outcomes for patients receiving DOAC who were managed by either a UC plus PMT or AMS care model compared with UC.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anticoagulants</subject><subject>Anticoagulants - adverse effects</subject><subject>Atrial Fibrillation - complications</subject><subject>Atrial Fibrillation - diagnosis</subject><subject>Atrial Fibrillation - drug therapy</subject><subject>Capitation</subject><subject>Cardiac arrhythmia</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Cohort analysis</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Online Only</subject><subject>Original Investigation</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Stroke - diagnosis</subject><subject>Stroke - etiology</subject><subject>Stroke - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Warfarin - adverse effects</subject><issn>2574-3805</issn><issn>2574-3805</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNpdUV1vFCEUJUZjm9q_YCb64suuwB0Y8MVMVqtN2uyDGh8JwzBb1hlYgdEY_7ysu23avlxuOB-5JwehVwQvCcbk7VZP2tv8O8QfYWf9kmIKS0pkQ56gU8qaegECs6f39hN0ntIWY0wxAcnZc3QCTU1wzckp-tumFIzT2QVfhaH64KI1uVpHPVatz84EvZnHA3ytvd7YyfpcfclRZ7txNlXfXb6pVqPzzhTNes4mTOV7CLFq-3nMR0aboyv4heuiGw-GL9CzQY_Jnh_fM_Tt4uPX1efF1frT5aq9WhiQIi-A4abpJAMq6l7X0HONwfYYN0AlDIRjIequTD7wBjA3phMMmKGN7OhgBzhD7w--u7mbbG9KgBJP7aKbdPyjgnbqIeLdjdqEX4pgoJzXsji8OTrE8HO2KavJJWNLDm_DnBQVAFIKwUShvn5E3YY5-pKvsGpglDO2N3x3YJkYUop2uLuGYLXvWT3qWe17Vv97LuKX9_PcSW9bhX_Ms6qY</recordid><startdate>20230703</startdate><enddate>20230703</enddate><creator>Derington, Catherine G</creator><creator>Goodrich, Glenn K</creator><creator>Xu, Stanley</creator><creator>Clark, Nathan P</creator><creator>Reynolds, Kristi</creator><creator>An, Jaejin</creator><creator>Witt, Daniel M</creator><creator>Smith, David H</creator><creator>O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen</creator><creator>Lang, Daniel T</creator><creator>Ho, P Michael</creator><creator>Cheetham, T Craig</creator><creator>Comer, Angela C</creator><creator>King, Jordan B</creator><general>American Medical Association</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230703</creationdate><title>Association of Direct Oral Anticoagulation Management Strategies With Clinical Outcomes for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation</title><author>Derington, Catherine G ; Goodrich, Glenn K ; Xu, Stanley ; Clark, Nathan P ; Reynolds, Kristi ; An, Jaejin ; Witt, Daniel M ; Smith, David H ; O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen ; Lang, Daniel T ; Ho, P Michael ; Cheetham, T Craig ; Comer, Angela C ; King, Jordan B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c398t-35077b953284da43d6a03ed0073293f160884b6086f67306ccb8535c279b2fef3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anticoagulants</topic><topic>Anticoagulants - adverse effects</topic><topic>Atrial Fibrillation - complications</topic><topic>Atrial Fibrillation - diagnosis</topic><topic>Atrial Fibrillation - drug therapy</topic><topic>Capitation</topic><topic>Cardiac arrhythmia</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Cohort analysis</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Online Only</topic><topic>Original Investigation</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Stroke - diagnosis</topic><topic>Stroke - etiology</topic><topic>Stroke - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Warfarin - adverse effects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Derington, Catherine G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goodrich, Glenn K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Stanley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clark, Nathan P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reynolds, Kristi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>An, Jaejin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Witt, Daniel M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, David H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lang, Daniel T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ho, P Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheetham, T Craig</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Comer, Angela C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>King, Jordan B</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>JAMA network open</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Derington, Catherine G</au><au>Goodrich, Glenn K</au><au>Xu, Stanley</au><au>Clark, Nathan P</au><au>Reynolds, Kristi</au><au>An, Jaejin</au><au>Witt, Daniel M</au><au>Smith, David H</au><au>O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Maureen</au><au>Lang, Daniel T</au><au>Ho, P Michael</au><au>Cheetham, T Craig</au><au>Comer, Angela C</au><au>King, Jordan B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Association of Direct Oral Anticoagulation Management Strategies With Clinical Outcomes for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation</atitle><jtitle>JAMA network open</jtitle><addtitle>JAMA Netw Open</addtitle><date>2023-07-03</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e2321971</spage><pages>e2321971-</pages><issn>2574-3805</issn><eissn>2574-3805</eissn><abstract>Anticoagulation management services (AMSs; ie, warfarin clinics) have evolved to include patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), but it is unknown whether DOAC therapy management services improve outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). To compare outcomes associated with 3 DOAC care models for preventing adverse anticoagulation-related outcomes among patients with AF. This retrospective cohort study included 44 746 adult patients with a diagnosis of AF who initiated oral anticoagulation (DOAC or warfarin) between August 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, in 3 Kaiser Permanente (KP) regions. Statistical analysis was conducted from August 2021 through May 2023. Each KP region used an AMS to manage warfarin but used distinct approaches to DOAC care: (1) usual care (UC) by the prescribing clinician, (2) UC plus an automated population management tool (PMT), or (3) pharmacist-managed AMS care. Propensity scores and inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) were estimated. Direct oral anticoagulant care models were first indirectly compared using warfarin as a common comparator within each region and then directly compared across regions. Patients were followed up until the first occurrence of an outcome (composite of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, other major bleeding, or death), discontinuation of KP membership, or December 31, 2020. Overall, 44 746 patients were included: 6182 in the UC care model (3297 DOAC; 2885 warfarin), 33 625 in the UC plus PMT care model (21 891 DOAC; 11 734 warfarin), and 4939 in the AMS care model (2089 DOAC; 2850 warfarin). Baseline characteristics (mean [SD] age, 73.1 [10.6] years, 56.1% male, 67.2% non-Hispanic White, median CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, female sex] score of 3 [IQR, 2-5]) were well balanced after IPTW. Over a median follow-up of 2 years, patients who received the UC plus PMT or AMS care model did not have significantly better outcomes than those who received UC. The incidence rate of the composite outcome was 5.4% per year for DOAC and 9.1% per year for warfarin for those in the UC group, 6.1% per year for DOAC and 10.5% per year for those in the UC plus PMT group, and 5.1% per year for DOAC and 8.0% per year for those in the AMS group. The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the composite outcome comparing DOAC vs warfarin were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.05) in the UC group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.79-0.90) in the UC plus PMT group, and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.72-0.99) in the AMS group (P = .62 for heterogeneity across care models). When directly comparing patients receiving DOAC, the IPTW-adjusted HR was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.85-1.34) for the UC plus PMT group vs the UC group and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71-1.02) for the AMS group vs the UC group. This cohort study did not find appreciably better outcomes for patients receiving DOAC who were managed by either a UC plus PMT or AMS care model compared with UC.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Medical Association</pub><pmid>37410461</pmid><doi>10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.21971</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2574-3805
ispartof JAMA network open, 2023-07, Vol.6 (7), p.e2321971
issn 2574-3805
2574-3805
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10326649
source Publicly Available Content Database
subjects Adult
Aged
Anticoagulants
Anticoagulants - adverse effects
Atrial Fibrillation - complications
Atrial Fibrillation - diagnosis
Atrial Fibrillation - drug therapy
Capitation
Cardiac arrhythmia
Cardiology
Clinical outcomes
Cohort analysis
Cohort Studies
Female
Humans
Male
Online Only
Original Investigation
Retrospective Studies
Stroke - diagnosis
Stroke - etiology
Stroke - prevention & control
Warfarin - adverse effects
title Association of Direct Oral Anticoagulation Management Strategies With Clinical Outcomes for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T00%3A31%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Association%20of%20Direct%20Oral%20Anticoagulation%20Management%20Strategies%20With%20Clinical%20Outcomes%20for%20Adults%20With%20Atrial%20Fibrillation&rft.jtitle=JAMA%20network%20open&rft.au=Derington,%20Catherine%20G&rft.date=2023-07-03&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e2321971&rft.pages=e2321971-&rft.issn=2574-3805&rft.eissn=2574-3805&rft_id=info:doi/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.21971&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2843526559%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c398t-35077b953284da43d6a03ed0073293f160884b6086f67306ccb8535c279b2fef3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2843526559&rft_id=info:pmid/37410461&rfr_iscdi=true