Guideline-discordant dosing of direct-acting oral anticoagulants in the veterans health administration

Abstract Background Clear guidelines exist to guide the dosing of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs). It is not known how consistently these guidelines are followed in practice. Methods We studied patients from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who received DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) between 2010 and 2016. We used patient characteristics (age, creatinine, body mass) to identify which patients met guideline recommendations for low-dose therapy and which for full-dose therapy. We examined how often patient dosing was concordant with these recommendations. We examined variation in guideline-concordant dosing by site of care and over time. We examined patient-level predictors of guideline-concordant dosing using multivariable logistic models. Results A total of 73,672 patients who were prescribed DOACS were included. Of 5837 patients who were recommended to receive low-dose therapy, 1331 (23%) received full-dose therapy instead. Of 67,935 patients recommended to receive full-dose therapy, 4079 (6%) received low-dose therapy instead. Sites varied widely on guideline discordant dosing; on inappropriate low-dose therapy, sites varied from 0 to 15%, while on inappropriate high-dose therapy, from 0 to 41%. Guideline discordant therapy decreased by about 20% in a relative sense over time, but its absolute numbers grew as DOAC therapy became more common. The most important patient-level predictors of receiving guideline-discordant therapy were older age and creatinine function being near the cutoff value. Conclusions A substantial portion of DOAC prescriptions in the VA system are dosed contrary to clinical guidelines. This phenomenon varies widely across sites of care and has persisted over time.

Download Full-text

A Low-Dose 4F-PCC Protocol for DOAC-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine ◽

10.1177/0885066619840992 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 35 (11) ◽

pp. 1203-1208 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Karen Berger ◽

Melissa Santibañez ◽

Lina Lin ◽

Christine A. Lesch

Keyword(s):

Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Low Dose ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Thrombotic Risk ◽

Real World Setting ◽

Direct Acting ◽

Current Guidelines ◽

Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulants

Purpose: Current guidelines favor 4F-PCC over plasma for reversal of warfarin. Uncertainty remains on the hemostatic effectiveness and thrombotic risk of 4F-PCC for direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), particularly in patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a lower dose protocol of 25 units/kg 4F-PCC for the management of DOAC-associated ICH in a real-world setting. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study of adult patients who received at least one dose of 4F-PCC from March 2014 to December 2015 for DOAC-associated ICH. The primary outcome was hemostatic effectiveness within 24 hours. The secondary outcome was thromboembolic events within 14 days. Results: Twenty-two patients received 4F-PCC for DOAC-associated ICH and were included in the analysis. Hemostasis was evaluable in 19 patients with post-4F-PCC imaging available and occurred in 18/19 (94.7%) patients. Thromboembolism occurred in 2 out of 22 patients (9.1%). Conclusions: The use of a lower dose protocol of 25 units/kg of 4F-PCC resulted in high rates of hemostasis in patients with DOAC-associated ICH. Two patients developed thrombotic events within 14 days of 4F-PCC administration.

Download Full-text

National lung cancer screening utilization trends in the Veterans Health Administration.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.6547 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. 6547-6547 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Jennifer A. Lewis ◽

Jason Denton ◽

Michael E. Matheny ◽

Christopher G. Slatore ◽

Amelia W Maiga ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Cancer Screening ◽

Low Dose ◽

Lung Cancer Screening ◽

Veterans Health Administration ◽

Common Data Model ◽

Veterans Health ◽

Health Administration ◽

Low Dose Ct ◽

Over Time

6547 Background: Low-dose CT (LDCT) is an effective means for early lung cancer detection, but is often underutilized. An estimated 900,000 Veterans are eligible for lung cancer screening. We are the first to describe national lung cancer screening utilization trends in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Methods: We assembled a retrospective cohort of patients within the VHA’s Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model who underwent lung cancer screening. LDCT scans with Common Procedure Terminology (CPT) codes G0297 or 71250 from January 1, 2011 to May 31, 2018 were eligible for inclusion. We further selected exams described as “lung cancer screening,” “screening,” or “LCS.” We used descriptive statistics with frequencies and medians to calculate the total exams per Veteran and evaluate utilization trends over time and by region. Results: At initial screening, Veterans had a median age of 66 (IQR 61, 70), 95% were male, 76% Caucasian. From January 1, 2011 to May 31, 2018, 75 VHA facilities performed 129,363 LDCT exams for lung cancer screening; 87,950 (68%) initial and 41,413 (32%) subsequent exams. Screening has increased over time (226 in 2011-2012; 7848 in 2013-2014; 41,225 in 2015-2016; 80,064 in 2017 until May 31, 2018) in all regions. Providers in primary care/internal medicine (56%), family medicine (16%), pulmonology (6%), oncology (0.3%), other specialties (21%) ordered screening exams. Conclusions: Lung cancer screening with low-dose CT within the VHA increased over time within all geographic regions. Future strategies aimed at the Veteran, provider, and healthcare system levels are needed to increase lung cancer screening utilization among eligible Veterans. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text

Reversal of DIRECT-ACTING Oral Anticoagulants in Urgent Surgery of the Proximal Aorta: case Series and Review of the literature

Current Pharmaceutical Design ◽

10.2174/1381612825666181226150006 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 24 (38) ◽

pp. 4534-4539 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Eric Zimmermann ◽

Fawzi Ameer ◽

Berhane Worku ◽

Dimitrios Avgerinos

Keyword(s):

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Aortic Surgery ◽

Management Strategies ◽

Case Series ◽

Published Data ◽

Review Of Literature ◽

Clotting Factors ◽

Urgent Surgery ◽

Direct Acting ◽

Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulants

Introduction: Proximal aorta interventions impose significant bleeding risk. Patients on concomitant anticoagulation regimens compound the risk of bleeding in any surgery, but especially cardiothoracic interventions. The employment of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC), namely those that target clotting factors II or X, has expanded at a precipitous rate over the last decade. The emergence of their reversal agents has followed slowly, leaving clinicians with management dilemmas in urgent surgery. We discuss current reversal strategies based on the available published data and our experience with proximal aortic surgery in patients taking DOACs. Literature Search: We performed a review of literature and present three cases from our experience to offer insight into management strategies that have been historically successful. A review of literature was conducted via PubMed with the following search string: (NOAC or DOAC or TSOAC) and (aorta or aortic or (Stanford and type and a)). Case Presentation: We present three case presentations that illustrate the importance of DOAC identification and offer management strategies in mitigating associated bleeding risks in urgent or emergent surgeries. Conclusion: Treatment teams should be aware of the technical limitations of identifying and reversing DOACs. In view of the tendency toward publishing positive outcomes, more scientific rigor is required in the area of emergency DOAC reversal strategies.

Download Full-text

The use of direct acting oral anticoagulants in patients with COVID-19 infection

Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives ◽

10.1080/20009666.2020.1867295 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 184-186

Author(s):

Ragia Aly ◽

Sachin Gupta ◽

Balraj Singh ◽

Parminder Kaur ◽

Kunhwa Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Direct Acting ◽

Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulants

Download Full-text

Fluctuations in barriers to medication treatment for opioid use disorder prescribing over the course of a one-year external facilitation intervention

Addiction Science & Clinical Practice ◽

10.1186/s13722-021-00259-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Allison M. Gustavson ◽

Marie E. Kenny ◽

Jennifer P. Wisdom ◽

Hope A. Salameh ◽

Princess E. Ackland ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Implementation Strategies ◽

Opioid Use Disorder ◽

Veterans Health ◽

Health Administration ◽

Opioid Use ◽

Medication Treatment ◽

Conceptual Clarity ◽

Parihs Framework ◽

External Facilitation ◽

Over Time

Abstract Background The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is invested in expanding access to medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) to save lives. Access varies across VHA facilities and, thus, requires implementation strategies to promote system-wide adoption of MOUD. We conducted a 12-month study employing external facilitation that targeted MOUD treatment among low-adopting VHA facilities. In this study, we sought to evaluate the patterns of perceived barriers over 1 year of external implementation facilitation using the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework. Methods We randomly selected eight VHA facilities from the bottom quartile of the proportion of Veterans with an OUD diagnosis receiving MOUD (< 21%). The 1-year external implementation intervention included developmental evaluation to tailor the facilitation, an on-site visit, and monthly facilitation calls. Facilitators recorded detailed notes for each call on a structured template. Qualitative data was analyzed by coding and mapping barriers to the constructs in the i-PARIHS framework (Innovation, Recipients, Context). We identified emerging themes within each construct by month. Results Barriers related to the Innovation, such as provider perception of the need for MOUD in their setting, were minimal throughout the 12-month study. Barriers related to Recipients were predominant and fluctuated over time. Recipient barriers were common during the initial months when providers did not have the training and waivers necessary to prescribe MOUD. Once additional providers (Recipients) were trained and waivered to prescribe MOUD, Recipient barriers dropped and then resurfaced as the facilities worked to expand MOUD prescribing to other clinics. Context barriers, such as restrictions on which clinics could prescribe MOUD and fragmented communication across clinics regarding the management of patients receiving MOUD, emerged more prominently in the middle of the study. Conclusions VHA facilities participating in 12-month external facilitation interventions experienced fluctuations in barriers to MOUD prescribing with contextual barriers emerging after a facilitated reduction in recipient- level barriers. Adoption of MOUD prescribing in low-adopting VHA facilities requires continual reassessment, monitoring, and readjustment of implementation strategies over time to meet challenges. Although i-PARIHS was useful in categorizing most barriers, the lack of conceptual clarity was a concern for some constructs.

Download Full-text