Literature DB >> 22137798

Self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data.

Carl Heneghan1, Alison Ward, Rafael Perera, Clare Bankhead, Alice Fuller, Richard Stevens, Kairen Bradford, Sally Tyndel, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Jack Ansell, Rebecca Beyth, Artur Bernardo, Thomas Decker Christensen, M E Cromheecke, Robert G Edson, David Fitzmaurice, Alain P A Gadisseur, Josep M Garcia-Alamino, Chris Gardiner, J Michael Hasenkam, Alan Jacobson, Scott Kaatz, Farhad Kamali, Tayyaba Irfan Khan, Eve Knight, Heinrich Körtke, Marcel Levi, David Matchar, Bárbara Menéndez-Jándula, Ivo Rakovac, Christian Schaefer, Andrea Siebenhofer, Juan Carlos Souto, Rubina Sunderji, Kenneth Gin, Karen Shalansky, Heinz Völler, Otto Wagner, Armin Zittermann.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Uptake of self-testing and self-management of oral anticoagulation [corrected] has remained inconsistent, despite good evidence of their effectiveness. To clarify the value of self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation, we did a meta-analysis of individual patient data addressing several important gaps in the evidence, including an estimate of the effect on time to death, first major haemorrhage, and thromboembolism.
METHODS: We searched Ovid versions of Embase (1980-2009) and Medline (1966-2009), limiting searches to randomised trials with a maximally sensitive strategy. We approached all authors of included trials and requested individual patient data: primary outcomes were time to death, first major haemorrhage, and first thromboembolic event. We did prespecified subgroup analyses according to age, type of control-group care (anticoagulation-clinic care vs primary care), self-testing alone versus self-management, and sex. We analysed patients with mechanical heart valves or atrial fibrillation separately. We used a random-effect model method to calculate pooled hazard ratios and did tests for interaction and heterogeneity, and calculated a time-specific number needed to treat.
FINDINGS: Of 1357 abstracts, we included 11 trials with data for 6417 participants and 12,800 person-years of follow-up. We reported a significant reduction in thromboembolic events in the self-monitoring group (hazard ratio 0·51; 95% CI 0·31-0·85) but not for major haemorrhagic events (0·88, 0·74-1·06) or death (0·82, 0·62-1·09). Participants younger than 55 years showed a striking reduction in thrombotic events (hazard ratio 0·33, 95% CI 0·17-0·66), as did participants with mechanical heart valve (0·52, 0·35-0·77). Analysis of major outcomes in the very elderly (age ≥85 years, n=99) showed no significant adverse effects of the intervention for all outcomes.
INTERPRETATION: Our analysis showed that self-monitoring and self-management of oral coagulation is a safe option for suitable patients of all ages. Patients should also be offered the option to self-manage their disease with suitable health-care support as back-up. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Technology Assessment Programme, UK NIHR National School for Primary Care Research.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22137798     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61294-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  95 in total

1.  Pharmacogenetic testing: Current Evidence of Clinical Utility.

Authors:  Jivan Moaddeb; Susanne B Haga
Journal:  Ther Adv Drug Saf       Date:  2013-08-01

Review 2.  Evidence-based management of anticoagulant therapy: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Anne Holbrook; Sam Schulman; Daniel M Witt; Per Olav Vandvik; Jason Fish; Michael J Kovacs; Peter J Svensson; David L Veenstra; Mark Crowther; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 3.  Remote monitoring for better management of LVAD patients: the potential benefits of CardioMEMS.

Authors:  Jesse F Veenis; Jasper J Brugts
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2020-01-24

4.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of patient self-testing therapy of oral anticoagulation.

Authors:  Sutat Kantito; Surasak Saokaew; Sukit Yamwong; Prin Vathesatogkit; Wisuit Katekao; Piyamitr Sritara; Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.300

5.  In Reply.

Authors:  Ertunc Altiok; Nikolaus Marx
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 5.594

6.  Point-of-care INR coagulometers for self-management of oral anticoagulation: primary care diagnostic technology update.

Authors:  Annette Plüddemann; Matthew Thompson; Jane Wolstenholme; Christopher P Price; Carl Heneghan
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Self-monitoring.

Authors:  Chris Gunstone
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 8.  Oral Anticoagulation.

Authors:  Ertunc Altiok; Nikolaus Marx
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-11-16       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 9.  Top practice-changing articles over the last two years.

Authors:  Scott Kaatz; Brian F Gage
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 10.  Clinical considerations of anticoagulation therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Shu Zhang
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.066

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.