BACKGROUND: On average, patients receiving therapy with oral anticoagulants (OACs) in the community are in the therapeutic range only 55% of the time. Anticoagulation control strongly influences the risk of hemorrhagic and thromboembolic events in such patients. However, not all anticoagulation-associated events are attributable to poor anticoagulation control, nor do all hemorrhagic or thromboembolic events occur in anticoagulated patients. OBJECTIVE: Measure the proportion of serious hemorrhagic and thromboembolic events that would be avoided if anticoagulation control was perfect. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of eastern Ontario using population-based administrative databases. Anticoagulation control was determined for each day of OAC exposure using linear interpolation. Incident hemorrhagic or thromboembolic hospitalizations for control and OAC patients were identified. Hemorrhages and thromboemboli in OAC patients were deemed to be avoidable if they occurred at international normalized ratios of > 3 and < 2, respectively. RESULTS: The study included > 183,000 patient-years of observation with 6,400 patient-years of OAC exposure. Anticoagulation control could be determined for 51.5% of OAC exposure time. Control patients had hemorrhagic and thromboembolic event rates of 1.8% and 1.5% per year, respectively. A total of 10,020 people were exposed to OACs, and spent 14.2% and 26.7% of the time, respectively, with excessively high and low anticoagulation intensity. Excessively high anticoagulation intensity explained 25.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.4 to 31.7) and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.5 to 2.5) , respectively, of all serious hemorrhages in the anticoagulated and entire population. Excessively low anticoagulation intensity explained 11.1% (95% CI, 4.4 to 17.7) and 1.1% (95% CI, 0.7 to 1.6) of all thromboemboli, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that extreme anticoagulation intensity significantly impacted the health of the population. Improving anticoagulation control will have significant effects on the incidence of serious hemorrhagic and thromboembolic events in the both the anticoagulated and entire populations.
BACKGROUND: On average, patients receiving therapy with oral anticoagulants (OACs) in the community are in the therapeutic range only 55% of the time. Anticoagulation control strongly influences the risk of hemorrhagic and thromboembolic events in such patients. However, not all anticoagulation-associated events are attributable to poor anticoagulation control, nor do all hemorrhagic or thromboembolic events occur in anticoagulated patients. OBJECTIVE: Measure the proportion of serious hemorrhagic and thromboembolic events that would be avoided if anticoagulation control was perfect. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of eastern Ontario using population-based administrative databases. Anticoagulation control was determined for each day of OAC exposure using linear interpolation. Incident hemorrhagic or thromboembolic hospitalizations for control and OACpatients were identified. Hemorrhages and thromboemboli in OACpatients were deemed to be avoidable if they occurred at international normalized ratios of > 3 and < 2, respectively. RESULTS: The study included > 183,000 patient-years of observation with 6,400 patient-years of OAC exposure. Anticoagulation control could be determined for 51.5% of OAC exposure time. Control patients had hemorrhagic and thromboembolic event rates of 1.8% and 1.5% per year, respectively. A total of 10,020 people were exposed to OACs, and spent 14.2% and 26.7% of the time, respectively, with excessively high and low anticoagulation intensity. Excessively high anticoagulation intensity explained 25.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.4 to 31.7) and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.5 to 2.5) , respectively, of all serious hemorrhages in the anticoagulated and entire population. Excessively low anticoagulation intensity explained 11.1% (95% CI, 4.4 to 17.7) and 1.1% (95% CI, 0.7 to 1.6) of all thromboemboli, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that extreme anticoagulation intensity significantly impacted the health of the population. Improving anticoagulation control will have significant effects on the incidence of serious hemorrhagic and thromboembolic events in the both the anticoagulated and entire populations.
Authors: Regina E Roller; Bernhard Iglseder; Peter Dovjak; Monika Lechleitner; Ulrike Sommeregger; Ursula Benvenuti-Falger; Ronald Otto; Birgit Böhmdorfer; Markus Gosch Journal: Wien Med Wochenschr Date: 2010-06
Authors: David H Salinger; Danny D Shen; Kenneth Thummel; Ann K Wittkowsky; Paolo Vicini; David L Veenstra Journal: Pharmacogenet Genomics Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Jürgen H Prochaska; Sebastian Göbel; Markus Nagler; Torben Knöpfler; Lisa Eggebrecht; Heidrun Lamparter; Marina Panova-Noeva; Karsten Keller; Meike Coldewey; Christoph Bickel; Michael Lauterbach; Roland Hardt; Christine Espinola-Klein; Hugo Ten Cate; Thomas Rostock; Thomas Münzel; Philipp S Wild Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2018-06-09 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Joshua A Roth; Katharine Bradley; Kenneth E Thummel; David L Veenstra; Denise Boudreau Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2015-04-08 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Natalie Oake; Alison Jennings; Alan J Forster; Dean Fergusson; Steve Doucette; Carl van Walraven Journal: CMAJ Date: 2008-07-29 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Renato D Lopes; Richard C Becker; L Kristin Newby; Eric D Peterson; Elaine M Hylek; Robert Giugliano; Christopher B Granger; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Antonio C Carvalho; Otavio Berwanger; Roberto R Giraldez; Gilson Soares Feitosa-Filho; Marcia M Barbosa; Maria da Consolacao V Moreira; Renato A K Kalil; Marildes Freitas; Joao Carlos de Campos Guerra; Marcio Vinicius Lins Barros; Thiago da Rocha Rodrigues; Antonio C Lopes; David A Garcia Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 2.300