We have located links that may give you full text access.
Prescription of oral anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation and previous hospitalization in a cardiology department. Experience in actual practice in a tertiary hospital.
Revista Clínica Española 2015 August
INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation is the main reason for oral anticoagulation in our community. New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) overcome the disadvantages of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), although there are scarce data on its use in our community. The aim of our study was to assess the use of NOACs and anticoagulation control using VKA as measured by the time within the therapeutic range (TTR) in an actual clinical scenario.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted of 816 patients admitted to cardiology over a period of 3 years, with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation and anticoagulant treatment at discharge. We assessed the percentage of patients prescribed NOACs and the TTR with VKA. We compared safety and efficacy events during the 15-month follow-up among the patients prescribed NOAC, those prescribed VKA with a good TTR and those with a poor TTR.
RESULTS: The percentage of patients prescribed NOAC was 7.6%. Serial INR measurements found that 71.3% of patients had a poor TTR. Although the groups were not comparable, a higher incidence of the combined event was observed in those treated with VKA and a poor TTR compared with those prescribed NOAC (p=.01).
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with a previous hospitalization in cardiology in a tertiary hospital and a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, the rate of NOAC prescription is low, and the TTR with VKA was poor.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted of 816 patients admitted to cardiology over a period of 3 years, with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation and anticoagulant treatment at discharge. We assessed the percentage of patients prescribed NOACs and the TTR with VKA. We compared safety and efficacy events during the 15-month follow-up among the patients prescribed NOAC, those prescribed VKA with a good TTR and those with a poor TTR.
RESULTS: The percentage of patients prescribed NOAC was 7.6%. Serial INR measurements found that 71.3% of patients had a poor TTR. Although the groups were not comparable, a higher incidence of the combined event was observed in those treated with VKA and a poor TTR compared with those prescribed NOAC (p=.01).
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with a previous hospitalization in cardiology in a tertiary hospital and a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, the rate of NOAC prescription is low, and the TTR with VKA was poor.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app