Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Am Heart J. 2020 Nov;229:110-117. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.07.012. Epub 2020 Jul 24.
Many studies showing underuse of oral anticoagulants (OACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) predated the advent of the non-vitamin K antagonist OACs. We retrospectively examined use of OACs in a large commercially insured population.
Administrative claims data from 4 research partners participating in FDA-Catalyst, a program of the Sentinel Initiative, were queried in September 2017. Patients were included if they were ≥30 years old with ≥365 days of medical/pharmacy coverage, and had ≥2 diagnosis codes for AF, a CHADS-VASc score ≥2, absence of contraindications to OAC use, and no evidence of OAC use in the 365 days before the index AF diagnosis. The main outcome measures of the current analysis were rates of OAC use in the prior 12 months of cohort identification and factors associated with non-use.
A total of 197,806 AF patients met the eligibility criteria prior to assessment of OAC treatment. Of these, 179,580 (91%) patients were ≥65 years old and 73,286 (37%) patients were ≥80 years old. Half of the patients (98,903) were randomized to the early intervention arm in the IMPACT-AFib trial and constitute the cohort for this analysis. Of these, 32,295 (33%) had no evidence of OAC use in the prior 12 months. Compared with patients with evidence of OAC use in the prior 12 months, patients without OAC use were more likely to be ≥80 years old, women, and have a history of anemia (51% vs 47%) and less likely to have diabetes (41% vs 44%), history of stroke or TIA (15% vs 19%), and history of heart failure (39% vs 48%).
Despite a high risk of stroke, one-third of privately insured patients with AF and no obvious contraindications to an OAC were not treated with an OAC. There is an unmet need for evidence-based interventions that could lead to greater use of OACs in patients with AF at risk for stroke.
许多研究表明,在非维生素 K 拮抗剂口服抗凝剂 (OAC) 问世之前,房颤 (AF) 患者的 OAC 使用不足。我们回顾性地检查了大型商业保险人群中 OAC 的使用情况。
2017 年 9 月,从参与 FDA-Catalyst(哨兵计划的一个项目)的 4 个研究合作伙伴的管理索赔数据中进行了查询。如果患者年龄≥30 岁,有≥365 天的医疗/药房覆盖范围,并且有≥2 个 AF 诊断代码、CHADS-VASc 评分≥2、没有 OAC 使用的禁忌症,并且在 AF 诊断前的 365 天内没有 OAC 使用的证据,则将其纳入研究。本分析的主要观察指标是在队列确定前的 12 个月内 OAC 使用率和与未使用相关的因素。
在评估 OAC 治疗之前,共有 197806 名 AF 患者符合资格标准。其中,179580 名(91%)患者年龄≥65 岁,73286 名(37%)患者年龄≥80 岁。一半的患者(98903 名)被随机分配到 IMPACT-AFib 试验的早期干预组,构成了本分析的队列。其中,32295 名(33%)在过去 12 个月内没有 OAC 使用证据。与过去 12 个月内有 OAC 使用证据的患者相比,未使用 OAC 的患者更有可能年龄≥80 岁、为女性、有贫血史(51%比 47%),不太可能有糖尿病(41%比 44%)、中风或 TIA 史(15%比 19%)和心力衰竭史(39%比 48%)。
尽管存在高卒中风险,但三分之一没有明显 OAC 使用禁忌证的 AF 且私人保险的患者未接受 OAC 治疗。对于有卒中风险的 AF 患者,需要进行基于证据的干预措施,以增加 OAC 的使用。