Effectiveness, Safety, and Costs of Thromboprophylaxis with Enoxaparin or Unfractionated Heparin Among Medical Inpatients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease or Heart Failure.

IF 2.3 Q2 ECONOMICS
Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2024-02-20 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.36469/001c.92408
Alpesh N Amin, Alex Kartashov, Wilson Ngai, Kevin Steele, Ning Rosenthal
{"title":"Effectiveness, Safety, and Costs of Thromboprophylaxis with Enoxaparin or Unfractionated Heparin Among Medical Inpatients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease or Heart Failure.","authors":"Alpesh N Amin, Alex Kartashov, Wilson Ngai, Kevin Steele, Ning Rosenthal","doi":"10.36469/001c.92408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure (HF) are risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) help prevent hospital-associated VTE, but few studies have compared them in COPD or HF. <b>Objectives:</b> To compare effectiveness, safety, and costs of enoxaparin vs UFH thromboprophylaxis in medical inpatients with COPD or HF. <b>Methods:</b> This retrospective cohort study included adults with COPD or HF from the Premier PINC AI Healthcare Database. Included patients received prophylactic-dose enoxaparin or UFH during a >6-day index hospitalization (the first visit/admission that met selection criteria during the study period) between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2016. Multivariable regression models assessed independent associations between exposures and outcomes. Hospital costs were adjusted to 2017 US dollars. Patients were followed 90 days postdischarge (readmission period). <b>Results:</b> In the COPD cohort, 114 174 (69%) patients received enoxaparin and 51 011 (31%) received UFH. Among patients with COPD, enoxaparin recipients had 21%, 37%, and 10% lower odds of VTE, major bleeding, and in-hospital mortality during index admission, and 17% and 50% lower odds of major bleeding and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) during the readmission period, compared with UFH recipients (all <i>P</i> <.006). In the HF cohort, 58 488 (58%) patients received enoxaparin and 42 726 (42%) received UFH. Enoxaparin recipients had 24% and 10% lower odds of major bleeding and in-hospital mortality during index admission, and 13%, 11%, and 51% lower odds of VTE, major bleeding, and HIT during readmission (all <i>P</i> <.04) compared with UFH recipients. Enoxaparin recipients also had significantly lower total hospital costs during index admission (mean reduction per patient: COPD, <math><mn>1280</mn><mo>;</mo><mi>H</mi><mi>F</mi><mo>,</mo></math>2677) and readmission (COPD, <math><mn>379</mn><mo>;</mo><mi>H</mi><mi>F</mi><mo>,</mo></math>1024). Among inpatients with COPD or HF, thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin vs UFH was associated with significantly lower odds of bleeding, mortality, and HIT, and with lower hospital costs. <b>Conclusions:</b> This study suggests that thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin is associated with better outcomes and lower costs among medical inpatients with COPD or HF based on real-world evidence. Our findings underscore the importance of assessing clinical outcomes and side effects when evaluating cost-effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":16012,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research","volume":"11 1","pages":"44-56"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10883471/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36469/001c.92408","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure (HF) are risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) help prevent hospital-associated VTE, but few studies have compared them in COPD or HF. Objectives: To compare effectiveness, safety, and costs of enoxaparin vs UFH thromboprophylaxis in medical inpatients with COPD or HF. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included adults with COPD or HF from the Premier PINC AI Healthcare Database. Included patients received prophylactic-dose enoxaparin or UFH during a >6-day index hospitalization (the first visit/admission that met selection criteria during the study period) between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2016. Multivariable regression models assessed independent associations between exposures and outcomes. Hospital costs were adjusted to 2017 US dollars. Patients were followed 90 days postdischarge (readmission period). Results: In the COPD cohort, 114 174 (69%) patients received enoxaparin and 51 011 (31%) received UFH. Among patients with COPD, enoxaparin recipients had 21%, 37%, and 10% lower odds of VTE, major bleeding, and in-hospital mortality during index admission, and 17% and 50% lower odds of major bleeding and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) during the readmission period, compared with UFH recipients (all P <.006). In the HF cohort, 58 488 (58%) patients received enoxaparin and 42 726 (42%) received UFH. Enoxaparin recipients had 24% and 10% lower odds of major bleeding and in-hospital mortality during index admission, and 13%, 11%, and 51% lower odds of VTE, major bleeding, and HIT during readmission (all P <.04) compared with UFH recipients. Enoxaparin recipients also had significantly lower total hospital costs during index admission (mean reduction per patient: COPD, 1280;HF,2677) and readmission (COPD, 379;HF,1024). Among inpatients with COPD or HF, thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin vs UFH was associated with significantly lower odds of bleeding, mortality, and HIT, and with lower hospital costs. Conclusions: This study suggests that thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin is associated with better outcomes and lower costs among medical inpatients with COPD or HF based on real-world evidence. Our findings underscore the importance of assessing clinical outcomes and side effects when evaluating cost-effectiveness.

慢性阻塞性肺病或心力衰竭内科住院患者使用依诺肝素或非减量肝素进行血栓预防的有效性、安全性和成本。
背景:慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)和心力衰竭(HF)是静脉血栓栓塞症(VTE)的危险因素。依诺肝素和非分细肝素(UFH)有助于预防医院相关性 VTE,但很少有研究对这两种药物在 COPD 或 HF 患者中的应用进行比较。研究目的比较依诺肝素和 UFH 对慢性阻塞性肺病或高血压内科住院患者血栓预防的有效性、安全性和成本。方法: 采用回顾性队列研究:这项回顾性队列研究纳入了来自 Premier PINC AI 医疗保健数据库的慢性阻塞性肺病或高血压成人患者。纳入的患者在 2010 年 1 月 1 日至 2016 年 9 月 30 日期间,在 >6 天的指数住院期间(研究期间符合选择标准的首次就诊/入院)接受了预防剂量依诺肝素或 UFH。多变量回归模型评估了暴露与结果之间的独立关联。医院费用调整为 2017 年美元。出院后 90 天(再入院期)对患者进行随访。结果在慢性阻塞性肺病队列中,114 174 名患者(69%)接受了依诺肝素治疗,51 011 名患者(31%)接受了 UFH 治疗。在慢性阻塞性肺病患者中,与接受 UFH 治疗的患者(所有 P P 1280;HF,2677)和再入院患者(慢性阻塞性肺病,379;HF,1024)相比,接受依诺肝素治疗的患者入院时发生 VTE、大出血和院内死亡的几率分别降低了 21%、37% 和 10%,再入院时发生大出血和肝素诱发血小板减少症(HIT)的几率分别降低了 17% 和 50%。在慢性阻塞性肺病或高血压住院患者中,使用依诺肝素与 UFH 进行血栓预防治疗可显著降低出血几率、死亡率和 HIT,并降低住院费用。结论:本研究表明,根据现实世界的证据,在慢性阻塞性肺病或高血压内科住院患者中使用依诺肝素进行血栓预防与更好的治疗效果和更低的费用相关。我们的研究结果强调了在评估成本效益时评估临床效果和副作用的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信