Dataset Information

Adherence to oral anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Medications cannot exert their effect if not taken as prescribed by patients. Our objective was to summarise the observational evidence on adherence to oral anticoagulants (OACs) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS:In March 2019, we systematically searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO (from inception) for observational studies measuring adherence, its determinants and impacts in patients with AF. Mean adherence measures and corresponding proportions of adherent patients were pooled using random effects models. Factors shown to be independently associated with adherence were extracted as well as the clinical and economic outcomes of adherence. RESULTS:We included 30 studies. Pooled mean adherence scores of over half a million patients with AF 6?months and 1?year after therapy initiation were 77 (95% CI: 74-79) and 74 (68-79) out of 100, respectively. Drug-specific pooled mean adherence score at 6?months and 1?year were as follows: rivaroxaban: 78 (73-84) and 77 (69-86); apixaban: 77 (75-79) and 82 (74-89); dabigatran: 74 (69-79) and 75 (68-82), respectively. There was inadequate information on warfarin for inclusion in meta-analysis.Factors associated with increased adherence included: older age, higher stroke risk, once-daily regimen, history of hypertension, diabetes or stroke, concomitant cardiovascular medications, living in rural areas and being an experienced OAC user. Non-adherent patients were more likely to experience stroke and death, and incurred higher medical costs compared with patients with poor adherence. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings show that up to 30% of patients with AF are non-adherent, suggesting an important therapeutic challenge in this patient population.

SUBMITTER: Salmasi S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7245382 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Adherence to oral anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Salmasi Shahrzad S Loewen Peter S PS Tandun Rachel R Andrade Jason G JG De Vera Mary A MA

BMJ open 20200408 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Medications cannot exert their effect if not taken as prescribed by patients. Our objective was to summarise the observational evidence on adherence to oral anticoagulants (OACs) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).<h4>Methods</h4>In March 2019, we systematically searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO (from inception) for observational studies measuring adherence, its determinants and impacts in patients with AF. Mean adherence measures and correspondi ...[more]

PMID: 32273316

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective To compare the efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with atrial fibrillation.Design Systematic review, network meta-analysis, and cost effectiveness analysis. Data sources Medline, PreMedline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Published randomised trials evaluating the use of a DOAC, vitamin K antagonist, or antiplatelet drug for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation.Results 23 randomised trials involving 94?656 patients were analysed: 13 compared a DOAC with warfarin dosed to achieve a target INR of 2.0-3.0. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily (odds ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.94), dabigatran 150 mg twice daily (0.65, 0.52 to 0.81), edoxaban 60 mg once daily (0.86, 0.74 to 1.01), and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (0.88, 0.74 to 1.03) reduced the risk of stroke or systemic embolism compared with warfarin. The risk of stroke or systemic embolism was higher with edoxaban 60 mg once daily (1.33, 1.02 to 1.75) and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (1.35, 1.03 to 1.78) than with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily. The risk of all-cause mortality was lower with all DOACs than with warfarin. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily (0.71, 0.61 to 0.81), dabigatran 110 mg twice daily (0.80, 0.69 to 0.93), edoxaban 30 mg once daily (0.46, 0.40 to 0.54), and edoxaban 60 mg once daily (0.78, 0.69 to 0.90) reduced the risk of major bleeding compared with warfarin. The risk of major bleeding was higher with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily than apixaban 5 mg twice daily (1.33, 1.09 to 1.62), rivaroxaban 20 mg twice daily than apixaban 5 mg twice daily (1.45, 1.19 to 1.78), and rivaroxaban 20 mg twice daily than edoxaban 60 mg once daily (1.31, 1.07 to 1.59). The risk of intracranial bleeding was substantially lower for most DOACs compared with warfarin, whereas the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was higher with some DOACs than warfarin. Apixaban 5 mg twice daily was ranked the highest for most outcomes, and was cost effective compared with warfarin.Conclusions The network meta-analysis informs the choice of DOACs for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Several DOACs are of net benefit compared with warfarin. A trial directly comparing DOACs would overcome the need for indirect comparisons to be made through network meta-analysis.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD 42013005324.

Project description:BackgroundDirect-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have demonstrated superior efficacy in preventing stroke and death compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but their influence on dementia risk remains unclear.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative risks of dementia in DOAC vs warfarin in patients with AF.MethodsAn electronic literature search was conducted to retrieve studies reporting comparisons of dementia incidence between patients treated with DOACs and warfarin for AF. HRs and 95% CI were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. Meta-regression was performed to identify prognostic baseline variables. Network meta-analysis was performed to determine dementia risk between individual DOACs and warfarin.ResultsTen studies (n = 342,624) were retrieved. DOAC was associated with a significantly lower risk of developing dementia compared with warfarin (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.80-0.98; P = 0.017; I2 = 75%); significance was also seen in Asian patients (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68-0.86) but not non-Asian patients. Subgroup analyses of propensity score-matched studies and patients aged 65-75 years showed similar significance, but not for patients aged ≥75 years. Meta-regression found that a lower mean age corresponded to significantly greater favoring of DOAC over warfarin. Network meta-analysis found significant reductions in dementia risk over warfarin for rivaroxaban (HR: 0.854; 95% CI: 0.763-0.955), apixaban (HR: 0.881; 95% CI: 0.778-0.997), and dabigatran (HR: 0.871; 95% CI: 0.770-0.987); the highest-ranked treatment based on P scores was edoxaban.ConclusionsThe use of DOAC in AF significantly reduces dementia risk compared with warfarin, particularly in Asian patients. The possible reversal of this effect with increasing age merits further randomized trials with long-term follow-up. (Dementia Risk of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; CRD42022365634).

Project description:BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) increases the risk of developing a stroke by 20%. AF related strokes are associated with greater morbidity. Historically, warfarin was the anticoagulant of choice for stroke prevention in patients with AF but lately patients are being switched or started on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). DOACs are promoted as safer alternatives to warfarin and it is expected that they will be associated with fewer challenges both for patients and healthcare professionals. This systematic narrative review aimed to explore perspectives of patients and professionals on medicines optimisation of oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists and DOACs in atrial fibrillation.MethodsProspero registration CRD42018091591. Systematic searches undertaken of research studies (qualitative and quantitative), published February 2018 to November 2020 from several databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Medline Via Ovid, CINHAL via Ebsco, and PubMED via NCBI) following PRISMA methodology. Data were organised using Covidence software. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the included studies and synthesized the findings (thematic analysis approach).ResultsThirty-four studies were included. Studies were critically appraised using established critical appraisal tools (Qualsyst) and a risk of bias was assigned. Clinicians considered old age and the associated complexities such as co-morbidities and the increased potential for bleeding as potential barriers to optimising anticoagulation. Whereas patients' health and medication beliefs influenced adherence. Notably, structured patient support was important in enhancing safety and effective anticoagulation. For both patients and clinicians, confidence and experience of safe anticoagulation was influenced by the presence of co-morbidities, poor knowledge and understanding of AF and the purpose of anticoagulation.ConclusionAge, complex multimorbidity and polypharmacy influence prescribing, with DOACs being perceived to be safer than warfarin. This systematic narrative review suggests that interventions are needed to support patient self-management. There are residual anxieties associated with long term anticoagulation in the context of complexities.Trial registrationNot applicable.

Project description:BackgroundThe management of atrial fibrillation (AF) with oral anticoagulants (OAC) is generally recommended to reduce the risk of stroke. However, the decision to prescribe these medications for patients with AF and dementia remains controversial.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of retrospective cohort studies were conducted. The search encompassed PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases from inception until May 1st, 2023, with language limited to English. Eligible studies included comparisons between exposure to OAC vs. non-OAC in the AF population with dementia or cognitive impairment. Studies that compared the effects of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and vitamin-K antagonists were also included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcomes were ischemic stroke and major bleeding. This study was registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42023420678).ResultsA total of five studies (N = 21,962 patients) met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. The follow-up duration ranged from 1 to 4 years. Meta-analysis demonstrated that OAC treatment was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality in AF patients with dementia with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.79 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from 0.68 to 0.92, compared to non-OAC treatment. No statistical differences were observed in the risk of major bleeding (HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.88-1.42) or ischemic stroke (HR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.58-1.00). Three studies reported comparisons between DOAC and warfarin; however, pooled analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity.ConclusionThe use of OACs in individuals diagnosed with both AF and dementia holds the potential to reduce all-cause mortality rates, thereby improving the overall clinical prognosis within this specific population.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023420678, PROSPERO identifier, CRD42023420678.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent guidelines recommended that oral anticoagulants (OACs) should last for a minimum first 2 months after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and the long-term decision of anticoagulation after AF ablation should be based on the individual patient's risk of stroke rather than the rhythm status. There is controversy about the safety of discontinuing OACs in patients with atrial fibrillation after the blanking period due to the divergences between consensus recommendations and clinical practice.MethodsElectronic bibliographic sources (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) were searched until August 2023 to identify cohort studies about the safety of discontinuing OACs in patients with AF after the blanking period. The primary outcome was thromboembolism (TE). The secondary outcome was major bleeding events (MBEs). Two authors extracted articles independently using predefined data fields. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated based on a random-effects model.ResultsA total of 16 studies (11 prospective cohorts and 5 retrospective cohorts) enrolling 23,942 patients (14,382 OFF-OAC and 9560 ON-OAC) were included in our analysis. No significant difference emerged in the risk of TE between OFF-OAC and ON-OAC patients following AF ablation after the banking period (OR = 0.66; 95%CI, 0.43-1.01). Similar results emerged in the patients with a high risk of TE after stratification by the risk level of TE (OR = 0.72; 95%CI, 0.25-2.08). A significant reduction in incidences of major bleeding was found in the OFF-OAC patients compared with the ON-OAC patients (OR = 0.23; 95%CI, 0.12-0.42). Subgroup analyses for TE found a reduction of incidences in the subgroups who switched to antiplatelet drugs and with a follow-up duration <3 years. Subgroup analyses for MBEs found a significant reduction of incidences in all subgroups.ConclusionsOur study suggests it can be safe to discontinue OACs after successful AF ablation. Discontinuation of OACs may reduce the risk of MBEs while not increasing the risk of TE.

Dataset Information

Adherence to oral anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Publications

Adherence to oral anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets