Article

Can We Predict Daily Adherence to Warfarin? Results From the International Normalized Ratio Adherence and Genetics (IN-RANGE) Study

MSCE, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 707 Blockley Hall, 423 Guardian Dr, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6021, USA.
Chest (Impact Factor: 7.13). 11/2009; 137(4):883-9. DOI: 10.1378/chest.09-0039
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Warfarin is the primary therapy to prevent stroke and venous thromboembolism. Significant periods of nonadherence frequently go unreported by patients and undetected by providers. Currently, no comprehensive screening tool exists to help providers assess the risk of nonadherence at the time of initiation of warfarin therapy.
This article reports on a prospective cohort study of adults initiating warfarin therapy at two anticoagulation clinics (university- and Veterans Affairs-affiliated). Nonadherence, defined by failure to record a correct daily pill bottle opening, was measured daily by electronic pill cap monitoring. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to develop a point system to predict daily nonadherence to warfarin.
We followed 114 subjects for a median of 141 days. Median nonadherence of the participants was 14.4% (interquartile range [IQR], 5.8-33.8). A point system, based on nine demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors, distinguished those demonstrating low vs high levels of nonadherence: four points or fewer, median nonadherence 5.8% (IQR, 2.3-14.1); five points, 9.1% (IQR, 5.9-28.6); six points, 14.5% (IQR, 7.1-24.1); seven points, 14.7% (IQR, 7.0-34.7); and eight points or more, 29.3% (IQR, 15.5-41.9). The model produces a c-statistic of 0.66 (95% CI, 0.61-0.71), suggesting modest discriminating ability to predict day-level warfarin nonadherence.
Poor adherence to warfarin is common. A screening tool based on nine demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors, if further validated in other patient populations, may help to identify groups of patients at lower risk for nonadherence so that intensified efforts at increased monitoring and intervention can be focused on higher-risk patients.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Maureen Price, Aug 18, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
146 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article provides an overview of the clinical profile of oral dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa®, Pradax™) [hereafter referred to as dabigatran] when used for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF), followed by a review of cost-utility analyses of dabigatran in this patient population. Dabigatran (110 or 150mg twice daily) demonstrated noninferiority versus adjusted-dose warfarin with regard to the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism (primary endpoint) in patients with AF in the RE-LY trial, and the 150mg twice-daily dosage was significantly more effective than warfarin for this endpoint, as well as most other efficacy endpoints. The incidence of major bleeding was generally similar in patients receiving dabigatran 150mg twice daily or warfarin, but was lower in patients receiving dabigatran 110mg twice daily. With regard to other bleeding endpoints, dabigatran was generally associated with lower rates than warfarin, except for gastrointestinal major bleeding. Dabigatran (both dosages) was associated with a higher incidence of dyspepsia than warfarin. Results of modelled cost-utility analyses from several countries from the perspective of a healthcare payer over a lifetime (or 20-year) time horizon and primarily based on data from the RE-LY trial were generally consistent. All but one analysis demonstrated that twice-daily dabigatran 150mg (or age-adjusted, sequential dosing) was cost effective with regard to the incremental cost per QALY gained relative to adjusted-dose warfarin in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in AF patients, as the results were below generally accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds. In contrast, the incremental cost per QALY gained for dabigatran 110mg twice daily versus warfarin exceeded cost-effectiveness thresholds in all studies except one. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the cost utility of dabigatran versus warfarin was generally robust to variations in the majority of parameters. However, the incremental cost per QALY gained for dabigatran versus warfarin improved when levels of international normalized ratio control in warfarin recipients decreased and when the baseline level of risk of stroke increased.
    PharmacoEconomics 01/2012; 30(9). DOI:10.2165/11209130-000000000-00000 · 3.34 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Vorhofflimmern ist die häufigste Herzrhythmusstörung bei geriatrischen Patienten, die Prävalenz bei über 80-Jährigen beträgt etwa 10%. Patienten mit Vorhofflimmern haben ein doppelt so hohes Mortalitätsrisiko, das Risiko für einen Schlaganfall ist um den Faktor 5 erhöht. Im Gegensatz dazu stehen die aktuellen Leitlinien der Europäischen Kardiologischen Gesellschaft (ESC), die diese Patientengruppe kaum berücksichtigen. Insbesondere mangelt es an Empfehlungen zu alltäglichen Fragen in der klinischen Betreuung dieser Patientengruppe. Ziel der vorliegenden Arbeit ist, für geriatrisch tätige Kolleg(inn)en unter Aufarbeitung der spezifischen Fachliteratur die vorliegende europäische Leitlinie für dieses Patientenkollektiv zu ergänzen. Diskutiert werden die Themenbereiche Rhythmus- versus Frequenzkontrolle, Antikoagulation, Outcome und Prävention, Stürze, Compliance/Adhärenz, Polypharmazie, geriatrisches Assessment, Demenz, Pflegeheimpatienten und Frailty nach Literaturrecherche in PubMed in Hinblick auf den geriatrischen Patienten. Individuelle Aspekte sollten in die Therapiegestaltung einfließen, allerdings darf die Komplexität dieser Patienten nicht zu einer bedingungslosen Individualisierung der Therapie abseits der Leitlinien führen. Denn es gibt zahlreiche Literaturstellen, mit denen sich viele offene Fragen im Zusammenhang mit Vorhofflimmern bei geriatrischen Patienten beantworten lassen.
    Zeitschrift für Gerontologie + Geriatrie 01/2012; 45(1). DOI:10.1007/s00391-011-0268-0 · 1.02 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Warfarin is a widely used oral anticoagulant. It is highly efficacious for the treatment and prevention of thromboembolic disorders despite its narrow therapeutic window. Poor compliance with warfarin is common and a major contributor to poor anticoagulation control. A number of psychosocial issues (e.g. depressive symptoms, attitudinal and behavioral factors, cognitive function, lack of social support, limited English proficiency, health illiteracy) have been associated with warfarin non-compliance among patients in anticoagulation clinics. Patient-specific features, such as these, are important to identify in order to develop appropriate and practical interventions. Health literacy and limited English proficiency are the extension of issues related to culture, language, and ethnicity. A better understanding of patients' functioning level and health utilization factors may help to develop and target interventions for high risk patients and reduce complications from suboptimal therapy and poor warfarin management due to non-compliance. Four patient case scenarios will be used to illustrate these issues and identify potential interventions to optimize warfarin therapy.
    Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 02/2011; 31(3):321-5. DOI:10.1007/s11239-011-0560-2 · 2.17 Impact Factor
Show more