AIMS: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a distinctive method of evaluating patient response to health care or treatment. This systematic review aimed to analyse the impact of PROs in patients on direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) treatment, prescribed for any indication (e.g. venous thromboembolism treatment or atrial fibrillation) using controlled trials (CT) and real-world observational studies (OS). METHODS: A systematic search of articles was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using databases, with the last update in November 2018. The Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing bias in randomized CTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale adapted for cross-sectional studies were used. Outcomes evaluated were related to health-related quality of life (HRQoL), satisfaction, adherence and compliance. RESULTS: Twenty-one original studies (6 CT, 15 OS) were included. HRQoL was assessed by 6 (1 CT, 5 OS) studies and reported that HRQoL scores were similar in patients on DOACs and warfarin. Patients prescribed DOACs presented higher HRQoL scores which were attributed to lack of intense monitoring required compared with warfarin but this was not statistically significant. The majority of studies (5 CT, 9 OS) investigated patient-reported satisfaction, indicating greater satisfaction with DOACs with significantly lower burden and increased benefit scores for patients on DOACs. Patient-reported expectations, compliance and adherence were similar for patients on DOACs and warfarin. CONCLUSION: Patients appear to prefer treatment with DOACs vs warfarin. This is shown by the higher quality of life, satisfaction and adherence described in the studies. However, heterogeneity in the analysed studies does not allow firm conclusions.
AIMS: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a distinctive method of evaluating patient response to health care or treatment. This systematic review aimed to analyse the impact of PROs in patients on direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) treatment, prescribed for any indication (e.g. venous thromboembolism treatment or atrial fibrillation) using controlled trials (CT) and real-world observational studies (OS). METHODS: A systematic search of articles was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using databases, with the last update in November 2018. The Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing bias in randomized CTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale adapted for cross-sectional studies were used. Outcomes evaluated were related to health-related quality of life (HRQoL), satisfaction, adherence and compliance. RESULTS: Twenty-one original studies (6 CT, 15 OS) were included. HRQoL was assessed by 6 (1 CT, 5 OS) studies and reported that HRQoL scores were similar in patients on DOACs and warfarin. Patients prescribed DOACs presented higher HRQoL scores which were attributed to lack of intense monitoring required compared with warfarin but this was not statistically significant. The majority of studies (5 CT, 9 OS) investigated patient-reported satisfaction, indicating greater satisfaction with DOACs with significantly lower burden and increased benefit scores for patients on DOACs. Patient-reported expectations, compliance and adherence were similar for patients on DOACs and warfarin. CONCLUSION:Patients appear to prefer treatment with DOACs vs warfarin. This is shown by the higher quality of life, satisfaction and adherence described in the studies. However, heterogeneity in the analysed studies does not allow firm conclusions.
Authors: Emilio Márquez-Contreras; Nieves Martell-Claros; Vicente Gil-Guillén; Mariano De la Figuera-Von Wichmann; Eugenio Sánchez-López; Ines Gil-Gil; Sara Márquez-Rivero Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Paulus Kirchhof; Stefano Benussi; Dipak Kotecha; Anders Ahlsson; Dan Atar; Barbara Casadei; Manuel Castella; Hans-Christoph Diener; Hein Heidbuchel; Jeroen Hendriks; Gerhard Hindricks; Antonis S Manolis; Jonas Oldgren; Bogdan Alexandru Popescu; Ulrich Schotten; Bart Van Putte; Panagiotis Vardas Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2016-08-27 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Ma Del Mar Contreras Muruaga; José Vivancos; Gemma Reig; Ayoze González; Pere Cardona; José Mª Ramírez-Moreno; Joan Martí; Carmen Suárez Fernández Journal: J Comp Eff Res Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 1.744
Authors: Nicholas W Carris; Andrew Y Hwang; Steven M Smith; James R Taylor; Karen Sando; Jason Powell; Eric I Rosenberg; Marc S Zumberg; John G Gums; Eric A Dietrich; Katherine Vogel Anderson Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Paula Tiili; Ioannis Leventis; Janne Kinnunen; Ida Svedjebäck; Mika Lehto; Efstathia Karagkiozi; Dimitrios Sagris; George Ntaios; Jukka Putaala Journal: Ann Med Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 4.709
Authors: Shahrzad Salmasi; Adenike Adelakun; Abdollah Safari; Leanne Kwan; Jenny MacGillivray; Jason G Andrade; Marc W Deyell; Anita Kapanen; Peter Loewen Journal: CJC Open Date: 2021-06-29
Authors: Helen Badge; Tim Churches; Justine M Naylor; Wei Xuan; Elizabeth Armstrong; Leeanne Gray; John Fletcher; Iain Gosbell; Chung-Wei Christine Lin; Ian A Harris Journal: J Patient Rep Outcomes Date: 2022-10-12
Authors: Myrthe M A Toorop; Nienke van Rein; Melchior C Nierman; Helga W Vermaas; Menno V Huisman; Felix J M van der Meer; Suzanne C Cannegieter; Willem M Lijfering Journal: J Thromb Haemost Date: 2020-05-06 Impact factor: 5.824
Authors: Aileen Murphy; Stephen Brosnan; Stephen McCarthy; Paidi O'Raghallaigh; Colin Bradley; Ann Kirby Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-09-24 Impact factor: 2.692