Dataset Information

Dabigatran Versus Rivaroxaban for Secondary Stroke Prevention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Rehabilitated in Skilled Nursing Facilities.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Thromboembolic and bleeding risk are elevated in older patients with atrial fibrillation and prior stroke. We compared dabigatran with rivaroxaban for secondary prevention in a national population after skilled nursing facility (SNF) discharge. METHODS:Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged???65 years with atrial fibrillation hospitalized for ischemic stroke (November 2011-October 2013) and subsequently admitted to an SNF were studied. Dabigatran (n?=?332) and rivaroxaban users (n?=?378) were compared in a retrospective, active comparator, new-user cohort. The index medication claim occurred within 120 days after hospital discharge and exposure continued until a 14-day treatment gap ('as treated'). The primary net clinical benefit outcome was the time to recurrent stroke, transient ischemic attack, intracranial hemorrhage, extracranial bleed, myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism, or death. All-cause mortality was evaluated separately as a secondary outcome. Multivariable adjusted Cox models stratified by dosage estimated hazard ratios (aHR). RESULTS:Among those receiving low dosages, the crude composite event rate was 40.4/100 person-years among dabigatran users and 33.7/100 person-years among rivaroxaban users. The composite outcome [aHR 1.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87-2.51] and all-cause mortality (aHR 1.67; 95% CI 0.84-3.31) rates were higher among low-dose dabigatran users. For those receiving standard doses, the crude composite event rates were 19.5/100 person-years for dabigatran users and 37.1/100 person-years for rivaroxaban users. Although no difference in mortality was observed, the composite outcome rate was lower among standard-dose dabigatran users (aHR 0.65; 95% CI 0.36-1.15). CONCLUSIONS:In older adults treated with direct-acting oral anticoagulants after ischemic stroke, outcome rates varied considerably by drug and dosage.

SUBMITTER: Alcusky M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6326174 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dabigatran Versus Rivaroxaban for Secondary Stroke Prevention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Rehabilitated in Skilled Nursing Facilities.

Alcusky Matthew M Hume Anne L AL Fisher Marc M Tjia Jennifer J Goldberg Robert J RJ McManus David D DD Lapane Kate L KL

Drugs & aging 20181201 12

<h4>Background</h4>Thromboembolic and bleeding risk are elevated in older patients with atrial fibrillation and prior stroke. We compared dabigatran with rivaroxaban for secondary prevention in a national population after skilled nursing facility (SNF) discharge.<h4>Methods</h4>Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years with atrial fibrillation hospitalized for ischemic stroke (November 2011-October 2013) and subsequently admitted to an SNF were studied. Dabigatran (n = 332) and riva ...[more]

PMID: 30421391

Similar Datasets

Project description:Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are widely used for prevention of stroke secondary to nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Increased use of NOACs is partially a result of simplified regimens compared with warfarin, which has been associated with poor adherence and persistence to therapy. Few studies have assessed adherence to NOACs, especially using contemporary data now that multiple NOACs are available.To evaluate adherence to NOACs in a cohort of newly diagnosed NVAF patients who are commercially insured.Incident, treatment-naïve NVAF patients were identified in 2013 from a large claims database. Patients were included who initiated rivaroxaban, dabigatran, or apixaban within 30 days after diagnosis. Subjects were required to have 12 months of pre-index information to assess demographic and clinical characteristics (comorbidities, CHA2 DS2-VASc, and HAS-BLED scores). Adherence to the index medication and adherence to any oral anticoagulant was assessed using proportion of days covered (PDC) at 3, 6, and 9 months. The number of switches and gaps in therapy were also evaluated. Analyses were stratified by stroke risk scores, and a logistic regression model was used to control for factors that may predict high adherence (PDC ? 0.80).A total of 3,455 rivaroxaban, 1,264 dabigatran, and 504 apixaban users were included with no major clinical or demographic differences between groups. At 3, 6, and 9 months of follow-up, dabigatran had lower adherence (PDC = 0.77, 0.67, and 0.62) compared with rivaroxaban (PDC = 0.84, 0.75, and 0.70; P < 0.001) and apixaban (PDC = 0.82, 0.75, and 0.71; P < 0.001), as well as nearly twice the number of switches to either other anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapy. At 9 months, 55.0% of rivaroxaban initiators had PDC ? 0.80, which was comparable with 56.8% for apixaban and significantly greater than 46.7% for dabigatran (P < 0.001). Adherence was higher overall as stroke risk increased and showed dabigatran had consistently lower adherence compared with the other NOACs. Overall adherence to any oral anticoagulants, allowing for switches to another NOAC or warfarin, was not dependent on the index medication (9-month PDC = 0.74, 0.71, and 0.74 for rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban initiators). Adjusted analyses showed that increasing age and comorbid hypertension and diabetes were associated with higher adherence. Compared with rivaroxaban, dabigatran initiators had nearly 30% lower odds of being adherent to their index medication, and no differences were observed between apixaban and rivaroxaban. At 9 months, there were no differences between NOACs for overall adherence to oral anticoagulants.In this real-world analysis of adherence to NOACs, rivaroxaban and apixaban had favorable profiles compared with dabigatran, and rivaroxaban appeared to have higher overall adherence among the NOACs. Clinicians and managed care organizations should consider the implications of lower adherence on clinical outcomes as well as quality assessment.The project described was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through grant number UL1TR000117. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. Brown reports receiving a training fellowship from Human and Pfizer. Study concept and design were contributed by Brown and Shewale. Talbert took the lead in data collection, along with Brown, and data interpretation was primarily performed by Brown, along with Shewale. The manuscript was written primarily by Brown, along with Shewale, and revised by all the authors.

Project description:ImportanceTelemedicine in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) has the potential to improve access and timeliness of care. During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 to 2022, telemedicine coverage expanded, but little is known about patterns of use in SNFs.ObjectiveTo describe patterns of telemedicine use in SNFs.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used 2018 to 2022 Medicare fee-for-service claims and Minimum Data Set 3.0 records to identify short- and long-term care SNF residents. Clinician visits were grouped into routine SNF visits (ie, regular primary care within SNF) and other outpatient visits (ie, with non-SNF affiliated primary and specialty care clinicians). Using a difference-in-differences approach, assessments included whether off-hours visits (measured as weekend visits), new specialist visits, psychiatrist visits, or visits for residents with limited mobility changed differentially between 2018 to 2019 and 2020 to 2021 for SNFs with high compared with low telemedicine use in 2020.ExposureTelemedicine adoption at SNF after 2020.Main outcomes and measuresNumber and proportion of telemedicine SNF and outpatient visits.ResultsAcross 15 434 SNFs and 4 463 591 residents from the period January 2019 through June 2022 (mean [SD] age, 79.7 [11.6] years; 61% female in 2020), telemedicine visits increased from 0.15% in January 2019 to February 2020 to 15% SNF visits and 25% outpatient visits in May 2020. By 2022, telemedicine dropped to 2% of SNF visits and 8% of outpatient visits. The proportion of SNFs with any telemedicine visits annually dropped from 91% in 2020 to 61% in 2022. The facilities with high telemedicine use were more likely to be rural (adjusted odds ratio vs urban, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.77 to 2.40). Psychiatry visits differentially increased in high vs low telemedicine-use SNFs (20.2% relative increase; 95% CI, 1.2% to 39.2%). In contrast, there was little change in outpatient visits for residents with limited mobility (7.2%; 95% CI, -0.1% to 14.6%) or new specialist visits (-0.7%; 95% CI, -2.5% to 1.2%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of SNF residents, telemedicine was rapidly adopted in early 2020 but subsequently stabilized at a low use rate that was nonetheless higher than before 2020. Higher telemedicine use in SNFs was associated with improved access to psychiatry visits in SNFs. A policy to encourage continued telemedicine use may facilitate further access to important services as the technology matures.

Dataset Information

Dabigatran Versus Rivaroxaban for Secondary Stroke Prevention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Rehabilitated in Skilled Nursing Facilities.

Publications

Dabigatran Versus Rivaroxaban for Secondary Stroke Prevention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Rehabilitated in Skilled Nursing Facilities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets