Wilson S Jo-Anne, Wells Philip S, Kovacs Michael J, Lewis Geoffrey M, Martin Janet, Burton Erica, Anderson David R
Department of Pharmacy, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre and Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS.
CMAJ. 2003 Aug 19;169(4):293-8.
There is growing evidence that better outcomes are achieved when anticoagulation is managed by anticoagulation clinics rather than by family physicians. We carried out a randomized controlled trial to evaluate these 2 models of anticoagulant care.
We randomly allocated patients who were expected to require warfarin sodium for 3 months either to anticoagulation clinics located in 3 Canadian tertiary hospitals or to their family physician practices. We evaluated the quality of oral anticoagulant management by comparing the proportion of time that the international normalized ratio (INR) of patients receiving warfarin sodium was within the target therapeutic range +/- 0.2 INR units (expanded therapeutic range) while they were managed in anticoagulation clinics as opposed to family physicians' care over 3 months. We measured the rates of thromboembolic and major hemorrhagic events and patient satisfaction in the 2 groups.
Of the 221 patients enrolled, 112 were randomly assigned to anticoagulation clinics and 109 to family physicians. The INR values of patients who were managed by anticoagulation clinics were within the expanded therapeutic range 82% of the time versus 76% of the time for those managed by family physicians (p = 0.034). High-risk INR values (defined as being < 1.5 or > 5.0) were more commonly observed in patients managed by family physicians (40%) than in patients managed by anticoagulation clinics (30%, p = 0.005). More INR measurements were performed by family physicians than by anticoagulation clinics (13 v. 11, p = 0.001). Major bleeding events (2 [2%] v. 1 [1%]), thromboembolic events (1 [1%] v. 2 [2%]) and deaths (5 [4%] v. 6 [6%]) occurred at a similar frequency in the anticoagulation clinic and family physician groups respectively. Of the 170 (77%) patients who completed the patient satisfaction questionnaire, more were satisfied when their anticoagulant management was managed through anticoagulation clinics than by their family physicians (p = 0.001).
Anticoagulation clinics provided better oral anticoagulant management than family physicians, but the differences were relatively modest.
越来越多的证据表明,与家庭医生管理抗凝治疗相比,由抗凝门诊管理抗凝治疗能取得更好的效果。我们开展了一项随机对照试验来评估这两种抗凝治疗模式。
我们将预计需要服用华法林钠3个月的患者随机分配至位于3家加拿大三级医院的抗凝门诊或其家庭医生处。通过比较服用华法林钠的患者在抗凝门诊接受管理与在家庭医生处接受管理的3个月期间,国际标准化比值(INR)处于目标治疗范围±0.2 INR单位(扩展治疗范围)内的时间比例,来评估口服抗凝治疗管理的质量。我们测量了两组的血栓栓塞和重大出血事件发生率以及患者满意度。
在纳入的221例患者中,112例被随机分配至抗凝门诊,109例被分配至家庭医生处。由抗凝门诊管理的患者,其INR值在扩展治疗范围内的时间占82%,而由家庭医生管理的患者这一比例为76%(p = 0.034)。家庭医生管理的患者中,高风险INR值(定义为<1.5或>5.0)的出现频率(40%)高于抗凝门诊管理的患者(30%,p = 0.005)。家庭医生进行的INR测量次数多于抗凝门诊(13次对11次,p = 0.001)。抗凝门诊组和家庭医生组的重大出血事件(2例[2%]对1例[1%])、血栓栓塞事件(1例[1%]对2例[2%])和死亡(5例[4%]对6例[6%])发生率相似。在完成患者满意度调查问卷的170例(77%)患者中,更多患者对抗凝门诊管理抗凝治疗的满意度高于家庭医生管理(p = 0.001)。
抗凝门诊提供的口服抗凝治疗管理优于家庭医生,但差异相对较小。