Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Clinical Research Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Beijing, China.
Department of Cardiology, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Thromb Haemost. 2018 Oct;118(10):1815-1822. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1670661. Epub 2018 Sep 20.
Anti-coagulant therapy satisfaction for patients with atrial fibrillation is a critical issue, which impacts on their treatment adherence and clinical outcomes. The disadvantages of long-term warfarin treatment are well-described, and novel oral anti-coagulants have become an alternative option.
We compared patient-reported treatment satisfaction with dabigatran versus warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients in China. Treatment satisfaction was assessed using the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) questionnaire, which included a 12-item ACTS Burdens scale and a 3-item ACTS Benefits scale.
Among 834 patients, 246 patients (29.5%) were taking dabigatran and the others were on warfarin. Propensity score matching was employed to identify 182 patient pairs with balanced baseline characteristics. The global ACTS Burdens score and the global ACTS Benefits score were comparable between the dabigatran and warfarin groups (44.86 ± 3.95 vs. 44.28 ± 3.51, = 0.423; 11.49 ± 2.92 vs. 11.42 ± 3.03, = 0.194, respectively). The monthly cost of dabigatran was significantly higher compared with that of warfarin due to a lack of insurance coverage (USD 176.78 ± 9.15 vs. USD 2.49 ± 0.76, = 0.000). The discontinuation rate of dabigatran was significantly higher than warfarin at the 6-month follow-up (33.5% vs. 19.2%, = 0.003). Adjusted logistic regression showed that dabigatran was associated with a significant greater odds of non-persistence (odds ratio: 2.13, 95% confidence interval: 1.27-3.59, = 0.004).
Dabigatran therapy in patients with NVAF in China associated with no improvement in satisfaction and a higher discontinuation rate compared with warfarin therapy largely due to increased economic burden.
房颤患者的抗凝治疗满意度是一个关键问题,这会影响他们的治疗依从性和临床结局。长期使用华法林治疗的弊端已有充分描述,新型口服抗凝剂已成为一种替代选择。
我们比较了中国非瓣膜性房颤(NVAF)患者对达比加群和华法林的治疗满意度。使用抗栓治疗量表(ACTS)问卷评估治疗满意度,该问卷包括 12 项 ACTS 负担量表和 3 项 ACTS 获益量表。
在 834 名患者中,246 名(29.5%)服用达比加群,其余服用华法林。采用倾向评分匹配方法,以确定 182 对基线特征平衡的患者对。达比加群组和华法林组的全球 ACTS 负担评分和全球 ACTS 获益评分相当(44.86±3.95 与 44.28±3.51, = 0.423;11.49±2.92 与 11.42±3.03, = 0.194)。由于缺乏保险覆盖,达比加群的每月费用明显高于华法林(176.78 美元±9.15 与 2.49 美元±0.76, = 0.000)。达比加群组在 6 个月随访时的停药率明显高于华法林组(33.5%与 19.2%, = 0.003)。调整后的逻辑回归显示,达比加群与非持续性的可能性显著增加相关(优势比:2.13,95%置信区间:1.27-3.59, = 0.004)。
中国 NVAF 患者应用达比加群治疗与华法林治疗相比,在满意度方面没有改善,停药率更高,这主要是由于经济负担增加所致。