Abstract

Background: The management of patients receiving warfarin is complicated. This study evaluated the anticoagulation quality of warfarin, explored potential predictors associated with poor anticoagulation quality, and elucidated the role of clinical pharmacists in the management of warfarin treatment. Methods: We retrospectively collected data on patients who either initially received warfarin or returned to warfarin after withdrawal between January 1, 2015 and January 1, 2020. The primary outcome was time in therapeutic range (TTR), and a TTR of ≥60% was considered as good anticoagulation quality. The secondary outcomes included thromboembolic and bleeding events during the follow-up. We assessed the TTR of each participant and investigated the potential predictors of poor anticoagulation quality (TTR < 60%) using logistic regression analysis. Additionally, we compared the warfarin anticoagulant quality and the incidence of clinical adverse events between atrial fibrillation patients in physician–pharmacist collaborative clinics (PPCCs) and general clinics. Results: Totally, 378 patients were included. The mean TTR of patients was 42.6 ± 29.8%, with only 32% of patients having achieved good anticoagulation quality. During a mean follow-up period of 192 ± 92 days, we found no significant differences in the incidences of thromboembolic events (5.0% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.967) and bleeding events (1.7% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.241) between patients with good and those with poor anticoagulation quality. The presence of PPCCs (odds ratio [OR]: 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25–0.90, p = 0.022) was an independent protective factor of poor anticoagulation quality, while the presence of more than four comorbidities (OR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.22–3.24, p = 0.006) and an average interval of international normalized ratio monitoring of >30 days (OR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.10–2.76, p = 0.019) were independent risk factors of poor anticoagulation quality. Compared with atrial fibrillation patients in general clinics, patients in PPCCs were found to have a significantly increased mean TTR level (48.4% ± 25.7% vs. 38.0% ± 27.6%, p = 0.014). Conclusion: The anticoagulation quality of warfarin was relatively low at our institution. The presence of more than four comorbidities and an average interval of international normalized ratio monitoring of >30 days independently contributed to poor anticoagulation quality. Meanwhile, the use of PPCC model improved the anticoagulation quality of warfarin.

Highlights

  • Non–vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs), such as dabigatran and rivaroxaban, have been successfully marketed in recent years, warfarin is still widely used in the prevention and treatment of various thromboembolic diseases due to its efficacy and low cost (Gu et al, 2019b)

  • A total of 2,435 outpatients who were treated with warfarin at our clinic were reviewed between January 1, 2015 and January 1, 2020

  • During the univariate regression analyses, we found that female sex, hemorrhage history, the presence of more than four comorbidities, treatment within a PPCC, ACEI/ARB use, and an average interval of international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring of >30 days were statistically associated with poor anticoagulation quality (p < 0.1 for each variable in the univariate regression model)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Non–vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs), such as dabigatran and rivaroxaban, have been successfully marketed in recent years, warfarin is still widely used in the prevention and treatment of various thromboembolic diseases due to its efficacy and low cost (Gu et al, 2019b). Maintaining the international normalized ratio (INR) within the therapeutic range could potentially optimize the benefit–risk ratio of warfarin treatment (Gu et al, 2019a). Few studies have focused on the anticoagulation quality of warfarin and the influence of clinical pharmacists in the treatment process. This study aimed to evaluate anticoagulation quality in patients undergoing warfarin treatment at our single center, explore potential predictors associated with poor anticoagulation quality, and elucidate the role of clinical pharmacists in the management of warfarin treatment. This study evaluated the anticoagulation quality of warfarin, explored potential predictors associated with poor anticoagulation quality, and elucidated the role of clinical pharmacists in the management of warfarin treatment

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call