Anastasia L Armbruster1, Katie S Buehler2, Sun H Min3, Margaret Riley4, Michael W Daly5. 1. Assistant Professor of Pharmacy Practice, Department of Pharmacy Practice, St Louis College of Pharmacy, MO. 2. Assistant Professor of Pharmacy Practice, St Louis College of Pharmacy, MO. 3. Staff Pharmacist, Walgreens Co, Longview, TX. 4. PGY-1 Pharmacy Resident, Indiana University Health, Indianapolis. 5. Clinical Pharmacy Manager, St Louis University Hospital, MO.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Warfarin has been the predominant anticoagulant for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Its disadvantages are well-known and include a narrow therapeutic index, drug interactions, and the need for frequent monitoring. Dabigatran etexilate, a direct thrombin inhibitor, presents less complexity in prescribing and has emerged as an alternate therapy to warfarin. Although dabigatran does not require routine monitoring, concerns associated with its use include the lack of a reversal agent, complex dose adjustments, and limited guidance to the management of drug interactions. OBJECTIVES: The goals of this study are to describe and to evaluate the use of dabigatran at a community hospital to identify areas for improvement in its prescribing. METHODS: This retrospective chart review of patients at a community hospital in St Louis, MO, included patients who received at least 1 dose of dabigatran between December 2010 and June 2012. The appropriateness of dabigatran was evaluated based on recommendations approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for stroke prophylaxis in the setting of NVAF. The composite end point of bleeding included hospital readmission within 1 year of receiving at least 1 dose of dabigatran at the study institution secondary to bleeding, bleeding associated with a decrease in hemoglobin level by ≥2 g/dL or transfusion of ≥2 units of blood, or a notation of bleeding in the patient's medical record. RESULTS: Of the 458 patients included in the evaluation, 76 (16.6%) patients receiving dabigatran were using an inappropriate regimen of this drug, based on dose and frequency on the first day of therapy of dabigatran or the presence of valvular disease. Many patients (42.3%) received at least 1 dose of a concomitant parenteral anticoagulant. The composite end point for bleeding was reported in 66 (14.4%) patients, including 23 (5%) with confirmed gastrointestinal bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: High-risk medications such as dabigatran require monitoring of prescribing habits to improve patient safety and outcomes. Various initiatives, such as pharmacist interventions, therapeutic interchanges, and obtaining appropriate patient parameters, can be implemented in the practice setting to ensure the appropriate use of oral anticoagulants and improved patient outcomes.
BACKGROUND:Warfarin has been the predominant anticoagulant for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Its disadvantages are well-known and include a narrow therapeutic index, drug interactions, and the need for frequent monitoring. Dabigatran etexilate, a direct thrombin inhibitor, presents less complexity in prescribing and has emerged as an alternate therapy to warfarin. Although dabigatran does not require routine monitoring, concerns associated with its use include the lack of a reversal agent, complex dose adjustments, and limited guidance to the management of drug interactions. OBJECTIVES: The goals of this study are to describe and to evaluate the use of dabigatran at a community hospital to identify areas for improvement in its prescribing. METHODS: This retrospective chart review of patients at a community hospital in St Louis, MO, included patients who received at least 1 dose of dabigatran between December 2010 and June 2012. The appropriateness of dabigatran was evaluated based on recommendations approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for stroke prophylaxis in the setting of NVAF. The composite end point of bleeding included hospital readmission within 1 year of receiving at least 1 dose of dabigatran at the study institution secondary to bleeding, bleeding associated with a decrease in hemoglobin level by ≥2 g/dL or transfusion of ≥2 units of blood, or a notation of bleeding in the patient's medical record. RESULTS: Of the 458 patients included in the evaluation, 76 (16.6%) patients receiving dabigatran were using an inappropriate regimen of this drug, based on dose and frequency on the first day of therapy of dabigatran or the presence of valvular disease. Many patients (42.3%) received at least 1 dose of a concomitant parenteral anticoagulant. The composite end point for bleeding was reported in 66 (14.4%) patients, including 23 (5%) with confirmed gastrointestinal bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: High-risk medications such as dabigatran require monitoring of prescribing habits to improve patient safety and outcomes. Various initiatives, such as pharmacist interventions, therapeutic interchanges, and obtaining appropriate patient parameters, can be implemented in the practice setting to ensure the appropriate use of oral anticoagulants and improved patient outcomes.
Authors: John W Eikelboom; Stuart J Connolly; Martina Brueckmann; Christopher B Granger; Arie P Kappetein; Michael J Mack; Jon Blatchford; Kevin Devenny; Jeffrey Friedman; Kelly Guiver; Ruth Harper; Yasser Khder; Maximilian T Lobmeyer; Hugo Maas; Jens-Uwe Voigt; Maarten L Simoons; Frans Van de Werf Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-08-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rupert Bauersachs; Scott D Berkowitz; Benjamin Brenner; Harry R Buller; Hervé Decousus; Alex S Gallus; Anthonie W Lensing; Frank Misselwitz; Martin H Prins; Gary E Raskob; Annelise Segers; Peter Verhamme; Phil Wells; Giancarlo Agnelli; Henri Bounameaux; Alexander Cohen; Bruce L Davidson; Franco Piovella; Sebastian Schellong Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-12-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Hein Heidbuchel; Peter Verhamme; Marco Alings; Matthias Antz; Werner Hacke; Jonas Oldgren; Peter Sinnaeve; A John Camm; Paulus Kirchhof Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2013-04-26 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Christopher B Granger; John H Alexander; John J V McMurray; Renato D Lopes; Elaine M Hylek; Michael Hanna; Hussein R Al-Khalidi; Jack Ansell; Dan Atar; Alvaro Avezum; M Cecilia Bahit; Rafael Diaz; J Donald Easton; Justin A Ezekowitz; Greg Flaker; David Garcia; Margarida Geraldes; Bernard J Gersh; Sergey Golitsyn; Shinya Goto; Antonio G Hermosillo; Stefan H Hohnloser; John Horowitz; Puneet Mohan; Petr Jansky; Basil S Lewis; Jose Luis Lopez-Sendon; Prem Pais; Alexander Parkhomenko; Freek W A Verheugt; Jun Zhu; Lars Wallentin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-08-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Anne M Holbrook; Jennifer A Pereira; Renee Labiris; Heather McDonald; James D Douketis; Mark Crowther; Philip S Wells Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2005-05-23
Authors: Sam Schulman; Clive Kearon; Ajay K Kakkar; Patrick Mismetti; Sebastian Schellong; Henry Eriksson; David Baanstra; Janet Schnee; Samuel Z Goldhaber Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-12-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sam Schulman; Ajay K Kakkar; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Sebastian Schellong; Henry Eriksson; Patrick Mismetti; Anita Vedel Christiansen; Jeffrey Friedman; Florence Le Maulf; Nuala Peter; Clive Kearon Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-12-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Hisham A Badreldin; Jahad Alghamdi; Omar Alshaya; Abdulmajeed Alshehri; Lamya Alreshoud; Renad Altoukhi; Senthilvel Vasudevan; Wesam W Ismail; Mohamed Salih Aziz Mohamed Journal: Int J Gen Med Date: 2020-07-22
Authors: Rebabonye B Pharithi; Deepti Ranganathan; Jim O'Brien; Emmanuel E Egom; Cathie Burke; Daniel Ryan; Christine McAuliffe; Marguerite Vaughan; Tara Coughlan; Edwina Morrissey; John McHugh; David Moore; Ronan Collins Journal: Ir J Med Sci Date: 2018-06-02 Impact factor: 1.568