Changes in Oral Anticoagulant Treatment Rates in Atrial Fibrillation before and after the Introduction of Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

Shah RU, Rupp AB, Mowery D, Zhang M, Stoddard G, Deshmukh V, Bray BE, Hess R, Rondina MT. Changes in Oral Anticoagulant Treatment Rates in Atrial Fibrillation before and after the Introduction of Direct Oral Anticoagulants. Neuroepidemiology. 2017 Jan 31; 47(3-4):201-209.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• PPO 15-406 – Towards Choosing Wisely: Assessing Reason for Exam in Carotid Ultrasound Reports

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have the potential to improve stroke prevention among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. We sought to determine if oral anticoagulation (OAC) treatment rates have increased since the approval of DOACs. METHODS: We identified 6,688 patients with AF at an academic medical center from January 2008 to June 2015. We examined OAC prescription rates over time and according to CHA2DS2VASc score using multivariable Poisson regression models, with an interaction term between risk score and year of AF diagnosis. RESULTS: Among 6,688 AF patients, 78% had CHA2DS2VASc scores = 2, 51.6% of whom received an OAC prescription within 90 days of diagnosis. The OAC prescription rate was 47.8% in the pre-DOAC era and peaked at 56.4% in 2014. Relative to the pre-DOAC era, prescription rates increased in 2012 and leveled off thereafter. The prescription rate for the highest risk group was 58.5%, compared with 45.0% in patients with a CHA2DS2VASc score of 2 (p < 0.01). In the adjusted analysis, prescription rates were higher for the higher risk group (adjusted relative risk 1.24 for CHA2DS2VASc score 7-9 vs. 2, 95% CI 1.09-1.40). CONCLUSIONS: OAC treatment rates have increased since DOAC introduction, but substantial treatment gaps remain, specifically among the higher risk patients.