Does hospitalisation improve oral anticoagulant optimisation in patients with atrial fibrillation?

IF 4.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Belayneh Kefale, Gregory M Peterson, Corinne Mirkazemi, Nathan B Dwyer, Mohammed S Salahudeen, Janette Radford, Camille M Boland, Woldesellassie M Bezabhe
{"title":"Does hospitalisation improve oral anticoagulant optimisation in patients with atrial fibrillation?","authors":"Belayneh Kefale, Gregory M Peterson, Corinne Mirkazemi, Nathan B Dwyer, Mohammed S Salahudeen, Janette Radford, Camille M Boland, Woldesellassie M Bezabhe","doi":"10.1111/eci.70011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hospitalisation offers an opportunity for medication review and correction, yet it has received little attention. We aimed to evaluate oral anticoagulant (OAC) use in patients with atrial fibrillation at hospital admission and discharge and determine whether hospitalisation improves care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an observational study at the Royal Hobart Hospital, Australia, in patients with atrial fibrillation. The appropriateness of stroke-prevention therapy at admission and discharge was evaluated using Australian guidelines. Factors associated with correcting inappropriate OAC therapy were identified using multiple logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 902 patients, 47.1% (n = 425) were receiving inappropriate OAC therapy at admission. The most common errors included lack of OAC therapy (58.6%, n = 249) and underdosing of direct-acting OACs (15.5%, n = 66). OAC therapy appropriateness at discharge was assessed for 844 patients; 73.8% were receiving appropriate therapy (versus 53.8% at admission (p < .001)). Specifically, 49.0% (n = 191) of the admission therapy errors were corrected. Correction was more likely in patients admitted to the stroke (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 16.93, 95% CI: 1.31-218.48) or cardiology wards (aOR: 4.10, 95% CI: 1.94-8.64), and if bleeding occurred during hospitalisation (aOR: 4.01, 95% CI: 1.07-14.99). Conversely, receiving rivaroxaban at admission (aOR: .23, 95% CI: .11-.51) and having a medium or high bleeding risk (ORBIT score ≥3) (aOR: .46, 95% CI: .25-.84) decreased the likelihood of correction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hospitalisation improved OAC therapy appropriateness; however, 51.0% of patients admitted with inappropriate therapy continued without correction. An intervention that enhances the hospital care team correcting inappropriate OAC therapy is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":12013,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"e70011"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.70011","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hospitalisation offers an opportunity for medication review and correction, yet it has received little attention. We aimed to evaluate oral anticoagulant (OAC) use in patients with atrial fibrillation at hospital admission and discharge and determine whether hospitalisation improves care.

Methods: We conducted an observational study at the Royal Hobart Hospital, Australia, in patients with atrial fibrillation. The appropriateness of stroke-prevention therapy at admission and discharge was evaluated using Australian guidelines. Factors associated with correcting inappropriate OAC therapy were identified using multiple logistic regression.

Results: Among 902 patients, 47.1% (n = 425) were receiving inappropriate OAC therapy at admission. The most common errors included lack of OAC therapy (58.6%, n = 249) and underdosing of direct-acting OACs (15.5%, n = 66). OAC therapy appropriateness at discharge was assessed for 844 patients; 73.8% were receiving appropriate therapy (versus 53.8% at admission (p < .001)). Specifically, 49.0% (n = 191) of the admission therapy errors were corrected. Correction was more likely in patients admitted to the stroke (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 16.93, 95% CI: 1.31-218.48) or cardiology wards (aOR: 4.10, 95% CI: 1.94-8.64), and if bleeding occurred during hospitalisation (aOR: 4.01, 95% CI: 1.07-14.99). Conversely, receiving rivaroxaban at admission (aOR: .23, 95% CI: .11-.51) and having a medium or high bleeding risk (ORBIT score ≥3) (aOR: .46, 95% CI: .25-.84) decreased the likelihood of correction.

Conclusion: Hospitalisation improved OAC therapy appropriateness; however, 51.0% of patients admitted with inappropriate therapy continued without correction. An intervention that enhances the hospital care team correcting inappropriate OAC therapy is warranted.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
3.60%
发文量
192
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: EJCI considers any original contribution from the most sophisticated basic molecular sciences to applied clinical and translational research and evidence-based medicine across a broad range of subspecialties. The EJCI publishes reports of high-quality research that pertain to the genetic, molecular, cellular, or physiological basis of human biology and disease, as well as research that addresses prevalence, diagnosis, course, treatment, and prevention of disease. We are primarily interested in studies directly pertinent to humans, but submission of robust in vitro and animal work is also encouraged. Interdisciplinary work and research using innovative methods and combinations of laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological methodologies and techniques is of great interest to the journal. Several categories of manuscripts (for detailed description see below) are considered: editorials, original articles (also including randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses), reviews (narrative reviews), opinion articles (including debates, perspectives and commentaries); and letters to the Editor.
×
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