Healthcare resource utilization and costs after initiating direct-acting oral anticoagulants or low molecular weight heparins in patients with venous thromboembolism.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Godwin Okoye, Kenechukwu C Ben-Umeh, Anton Lv Avanceña, Eberechukwu Onukwugha
{"title":"Healthcare resource utilization and costs after initiating direct-acting oral anticoagulants or low molecular weight heparins in patients with venous thromboembolism.","authors":"Godwin Okoye, Kenechukwu C Ben-Umeh, Anton Lv Avanceña, Eberechukwu Onukwugha","doi":"10.1177/1358863X241305097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Venous thromboembolism (VTE) can lead to significant healthcare resource utilization (HcRU) and costs. First-line treatments such as direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) are utilized for VTE management. There are limited observational studies to determine which first-line drug for VTE is associated with lower HcRU and cost. Therefore, we sought to compare HcRU and costs of commercially insured patients with VTE who initiated DOAC or LMWH in the US.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We utilized Merative MarketScan Research Database (2016-2021) to identify adults initiating DOAC or LMWH for VTE. Baseline measures were assessed 12 months prior to the index date of drug initiation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control confounding. For HcRU, logistic regression was used to model emergency room and inpatient visits and the negative binomial count model was used for outpatient visits. The average marginal effect for total healthcare cost comparing DOAC with LMWH users was estimated using a generalized linear model. HcRU and costs were evaluated for 12 months posttreatment initiation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DOAC users had lower odds of inpatient visits (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.59), emergency room visits (aOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99), and outpatient visits (adjusted incident rate ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.54) in comparison to LMWH users. DOAC users had lower total healthcare costs of -$9573 (95% CI -$11,149 to -$7997) (US dollars).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This cohort study suggests that DOAC use is associated with fewer inpatient, outpatient, and emergency room visits, and lower healthcare costs compared to LMWH use for VTE management.</p>","PeriodicalId":23604,"journal":{"name":"Vascular Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1358863X241305097"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1358863X241305097","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) can lead to significant healthcare resource utilization (HcRU) and costs. First-line treatments such as direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) are utilized for VTE management. There are limited observational studies to determine which first-line drug for VTE is associated with lower HcRU and cost. Therefore, we sought to compare HcRU and costs of commercially insured patients with VTE who initiated DOAC or LMWH in the US.

Methods: We utilized Merative MarketScan Research Database (2016-2021) to identify adults initiating DOAC or LMWH for VTE. Baseline measures were assessed 12 months prior to the index date of drug initiation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control confounding. For HcRU, logistic regression was used to model emergency room and inpatient visits and the negative binomial count model was used for outpatient visits. The average marginal effect for total healthcare cost comparing DOAC with LMWH users was estimated using a generalized linear model. HcRU and costs were evaluated for 12 months posttreatment initiation.

Results: DOAC users had lower odds of inpatient visits (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.59), emergency room visits (aOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99), and outpatient visits (adjusted incident rate ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.54) in comparison to LMWH users. DOAC users had lower total healthcare costs of -$9573 (95% CI -$11,149 to -$7997) (US dollars).

Conclusion: This cohort study suggests that DOAC use is associated with fewer inpatient, outpatient, and emergency room visits, and lower healthcare costs compared to LMWH use for VTE management.

静脉血栓栓塞患者开始使用直接作用口服抗凝剂或低分子肝素后的医疗资源利用和成本
背景:静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)可导致显著的医疗资源利用(HcRU)和成本。静脉血栓栓塞治疗采用直接作用口服抗凝剂(DOAC)和低分子肝素(LMWH)等一线治疗。有有限的观察性研究来确定哪种治疗静脉血栓栓塞的一线药物与较低的HcRU和成本相关。因此,我们试图比较在美国进行DOAC或低分子肝素治疗的商业保险VTE患者的HcRU和成本。方法:我们利用Merative MarketScan研究数据库(2016-2021)来确定使用DOAC或低分子肝素治疗静脉血栓栓塞的成年人。基线测量在起始用药日期前12个月进行评估。采用处理加权逆概率法控制混杂。对于HcRU,采用logistic回归对急诊室和住院就诊进行建模,对门诊就诊采用负二项计数模型。使用广义线性模型估计DOAC与低分子肝素使用者对总医疗成本的平均边际效应。治疗开始后12个月评估HcRU和成本。结果:与低分子肝素使用者相比,DOAC使用者的住院就诊几率(调整优势比[aOR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.46至0.59)、急诊室就诊几率(调整优势比[aOR] 0.86, 95% CI 0.73至0.99)和门诊就诊几率(调整事故率比0.52,95% CI 0.50至0.54)较低。DOAC用户的医疗保健总成本较低,为- 9573美元(95%置信区间为- 11149美元至- 7997美元)(美元)。结论:该队列研究表明,与低分子肝素相比,DOAC的使用与更少的住院、门诊和急诊室就诊以及更低的医疗成本有关。
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
Vascular Medicine
Vascular Medicine 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.70%
发文量
158
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The premier, ISI-ranked journal of vascular medicine. Integrates the latest research in vascular biology with advancements for the practice of vascular medicine and vascular surgery. It features original research and reviews on vascular biology, epidemiology, diagnosis, medical treatment and interventions for vascular disease. A member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
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