Hematology Service, University Hospital of Burgos, Avenida Islas Baleares 3, 09006, Burgos, Spain.
Primary Care Centre "Gamonal-Antigua", Av. de los Derechos Humanos.1, 09007, Burgos, Spain.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Nov 6;19(1):802. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4669-x.
We analyze the cost of an incorrect application, by the haematologist, of bridging anticoagulation in patients with low-risk atrial fibrillation (AF) needing interruption of treatment prior to a scheduled invasive procedure. Although not recommended, bridging therapy is widely used, resulting in avoidable costs and increased workload.
Observational retrospective study. We recorded demographic and clinical data including age, sex, type of procedure, use of bridging therapy with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), and haemorrhagic complications within 30 days of acenocoumarol withdrawal.
Acenocoumarol was stopped in 161 patients, 97 (60%) were male and 64 (40%) female. Average age was 76,11 ± 8,45 years. Procedures included: minor surgical intervention 58 (36%), colonoscopy 61 (38%), gastroscopy 11 (7%), breast biopsy 4 (2.5%), prostate biopsy 4 (2.5%), infiltration 5 (3%), and other 18 (11%). All patients received bridging anticoagulation with LMWH (40 mg enoxaparin per day) 3 days before and 3 days after the procedure (6 doses). We used a total of 966 doses, at €4.5 per unit, resulted in €4347 of total cost. No complications occurred in 156 patients (97%). Haemorrhage was observed in 5 cases: 1 major haemorrhage needing 6 days of hospital stay and transfusion, and 4 minor haemorrhages (2 patients needed emergency attendance and 2 required hospital admission for 3 and 2 days, respectively). The cost of emergency care was €237.36, and the cost of hospital stay was €6860.81 (€623.71 per day, for 11 days). The total cost of the incorrect application of the protocol was €11,445.17.
Guidelines about bridging anticoagulation in low risk AF patients undergoing scheduled invasive procedures were not followed. This practice increments the complications and supposes an increase in costs besides to an inadequate use of the human resources.
我们分析了血液学家在低危心房颤动(AF)患者中错误应用桥接抗凝治疗的成本,这些患者在计划进行侵入性操作之前需要中断治疗。尽管不推荐使用桥接治疗,但该治疗方法仍被广泛应用,导致了不必要的成本增加和工作量增加。
观察性回顾性研究。我们记录了人口统计学和临床数据,包括年龄、性别、手术类型、是否使用低分子肝素(LMWH)进行桥接治疗以及停用醋硝香豆素后 30 天内的出血并发症。
161 例患者停用醋硝香豆素,其中 97 例(60%)为男性,64 例(40%)为女性。平均年龄为 76.11±8.45 岁。手术包括:小手术干预 58 例(36%)、结肠镜检查 61 例(38%)、胃镜检查 11 例(7%)、乳腺活检 4 例(2.5%)、前列腺活检 4 例(2.5%)、浸润 5 例(3%)和其他 18 例(11%)。所有患者在手术前 3 天和手术后 3 天接受 LMWH(每天 40mg 依诺肝素)桥接抗凝治疗(共 6 剂)。我们共使用了 966 剂,每剂 4.5 欧元,总费用为 4347 欧元。156 例患者(97%)未发生并发症。5 例患者出现出血:1 例大出血需要住院治疗 6 天并输血,4 例小出血(2 例患者需要紧急就诊,2 例患者分别住院 3 天和 2 天)。紧急护理费用为 237.36 欧元,住院费用为 6860.81 欧元(每天 623.71 欧元,住院 11 天)。该方案不正确应用的总成本为 11445.17 欧元。
未遵循低危 AF 患者行计划侵入性操作时桥接抗凝治疗指南。这种做法增加了并发症,并导致成本增加,同时还导致人力资源的不合理使用。