Literature DB >> 12714829

Which approach to anticoagulation management is best? Illustration of an interactive mathematical model to support informed decision making.

Gregory P Samsa1, David B Matchar, David L Phillips, Jack McGrann.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Among patients with atrial fibrillation or mechanical heart valves, determining the best approach to oral anticoagulation largely depends on comparing the costs of anticoagulation management with the costs of events (thromboembolism and bleeding) averted. The Anticoagulation Management Event/Cost Model (ACME) is an interactive mathematical model intended to help clarify these trade-offs.
METHODS: The ACME is a series of linked, nested spreadsheets. At the least detailed level, the user specifies the percentage of patients falling into various management strategies (no anticoagulation, usual physician care, anticoagulation service, patient self-testing/self-management), and the ACME estimates event rates and costs. At more detailed levels the ACME performs a series of weighted average calculations combining, for example, utilization times unit price. Cost categories are divided into event-related and management-related costs (costs of management, testing, and medication).
RESULTS: Regardless of how anticoagulation is subsequently managed, perhaps the greatest benefit is obtained by moving patients who are not currently receiving anticoagulation onto warfarin. Additional benefits can be obtained by eliminating outliers (extremely high or extremely low anticoagulation levels). If changing to a more intensive approach also serves to reduce the tendency for physicians to prescribe anticoagulate below the optimal range, additional savings can be anticipated. The cost calculation typically involves a trade-off between increased up-front costs of anticoagulation management versus greater down-line savings associated with a decreased number of events. To assess the quality of anticoagulation within a given organization, it is critical to know the distribution of clotting levels for the population under anticoagulation.
CONCLUSIONS: Interactive mathematical models, if sufficiently well documented, can be helpful in clarifying decisions regarding costs and benefits of various methods of anticoagulation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12714829     DOI: 10.1023/a:1023276710895

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis        ISSN: 0929-5305            Impact factor:   2.300


  4 in total

Review 1.  Oral anticoagulants: mechanism of action, clinical effectiveness, and optimal therapeutic range.

Authors:  J Hirsh; J Dalen; D R Anderson; L Poller; H Bussey; J Ansell; D Deykin
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  Performing cost-effectiveness analysis by integrating randomized trial data with a comprehensive decision model: application to treatment of acute ischemic stroke.

Authors:  G P Samsa; R A Reutter; G Parmigiani; M Ancukiewicz; P Abrahamse; J Lipscomb; D B Matchar
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 3.  Relationship between test frequency and outcomes of anticoagulation: a literature review and commentary with implications for the design of randomized trials of patient self-management.

Authors:  G P Samsa; D B Matchar
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.300

4.  Improving the quality of anticoagulation of patients with atrial fibrillation in managed care organizations: results of the managing anticoagulation services trial.

Authors:  David B Matchar; Gregory P Samsa; Stuart J Cohen; Eugene Z Oddone; Annette E Jurgelski
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 4.965

  4 in total
  6 in total

1.  A policy model to evaluate the benefits, risks and costs of warfarin pharmacogenomic testing.

Authors:  Lisa M Meckley; James M Gudgeon; Jeffrey L Anderson; Marc S Williams; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Massachusetts Health Reform Cost Less and Was More Effective for Uninsured Individuals With Venous Thromboembolism: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Alok Kapoor; Nicholas Shaffer; Amresh Hanchate; Mark Roberts; Kenneth Smith
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  The cost effectiveness of anticoagulation management services for patients with atrial fibrillation and at high risk of stroke in the US.

Authors:  Patrick W Sullivan; Thomas W Arant; Samuel L Ellis; Heather Ulrich
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Rationale and design of the Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Study (LAAOS) III.

Authors:  Richard Whitlock; Jeff Healey; Jessica Vincent; Kate Brady; Kevin Teoh; Alistair Royse; Pallav Shah; Yingqiang Guo; Marco Alings; Richard J Folkeringa; Domenico Paparella; Andrea Colli; Steven R Meyer; Jean-François Legare; François Lamontagne; Wilko Reents; Andreas Böning; Stuart Connolly
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2014-01

5.  Multinational development of a questionnaire assessing patient satisfaction with anticoagulant treatment: the 'Perception of Anticoagulant Treatment Questionnaire' (PACT-Q).

Authors:  Martin H Prins; Alexia Marrel; Paulo Carita; David Anderson; Marie-Germaine Bousser; Harry Crijns; Silla Consoli; Benoit Arnould
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2009-02-06       Impact factor: 3.186

6.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of dabigatran and anticoagulation monitoring strategies of vitamin K antagonist.

Authors:  Misericòrdia Carles; Max Brosa; Juan Carlos Souto; Josep Maria Garcia-Alamino; Gordon Guyatt; Pablo Alonso-Coello
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 2.655

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.