Zeitschrift für Kardiologie

, Volume 94, Issue 3, pp 182–186 | Cite as

Self-Management of oral Anticoagulation in nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation (SMAAF study)

  • H. Völler
  • J. Glatz
  • U. Taborski
  • A. Bernardo
  • C. Dovifat
  • K. Heidinger
ORIGINAL PAPER

Summary

Most patients with atrial fibrillation are at risk of suffering thromboembolic events. This risk can be reduced by twothirds by efficient anticoagulation. This prospective multi-center trial investigated whether the quality of treatment can be improved by self-management in patients with atrial fibrillations (SMAAF Study) compared to conventional patient management by the family doctor.

Methods

Two thousand patients suitable for self-manage- ment were to be randomized into the two arms of the study. In the period of investigation from December 1999 to July 2001, only 202 patients (64.3±9.2 years, 69.3% men) consented to participate. The study was discontinued prematurely since the number of patients was too low. As a consequence, the group comparison is confined to the evaluation of the INR values measured using the two-tailed t test.

Results

Of the 202 patients included, 101 were assigned to the self-management group (64.6±9.6 years, 71.4% men) and 101 (64.1±8.9 years, 61.4% men, n.s.) were assigned to the group managed by the family doctor. The total number of INR measurements was 2 865. This comprised 2 072 measurements in patients under self-management and 793 in the family doctor group. The values were within the target range significantly more frequently (p=0.0061) in patients under self-management (67.8%) as compared to the family doctor group (58.5%). There was a trend with regard to the time within target range, but the difference was not significant (178.8±126 days as compared to 155.9±118.4 days). In the self-management group, there were two severe hemorrhages, and there was one thromboembolic event in the family doctor group.

Conclusion

Management of oral anticoagulation by INR self-management in patients with atrial fibrillation is not inferior to conventional care.

Key words

Anticoagulation INR self-management atrial fibrillation 

Selbstmanagement der Antikoagulation bei Patienten mit nichtvalvulärem Vorhofflimmern (SMAAF-Studie)

Zusammenfassung

Der Großteil der Patienten mit Vorhofflimmern ist durch ein thromboembolisches Ereignis gefährdet. Die Komplikationsrate kann durch eine effiziente Antikoagulation um zwei Drittel reduziert werden. Ob die Qualität der Therapieüberwachung durch das Selbstmanagement bei Patienten mit Vorhofflimmern (SMAAF-Studie) im Vergleich zur herkömmlichen bei Hausarzt betreuten Patienten verbessert werden kann, war Gegenstand dieser prospektiven Multicenter- Studie.

Methodik

Bei Eignung zum Selbstmanagement sollten 2 000 Patienten in die beiden Studienarme randomisiert werden. Im Untersuchungszeitraum von 12/99 bis 07/01 gaben lediglich 202 Patienten (64,3±9,2 Jahre, 69,3% Männer) ihr Einverständnis. Bei vorzeitigem Studienabbruch aufgrund zu niedriger Patientenzahl beschränkt sich der Gruppenvergleich auf die Auswertung gemessener INR-Werte mittels zweiseitigem t-Test.

Ergebnisse

Von den 202 eingeschlossenen Patienten wurden 101 der Selbstmanagement-Gruppe (64,6±9,6 Jahre, 71,4% Männer) und 101 (64,1±8,9 Jahre, 61,4% Männer, n.s.) der Hausarztgruppe zugeordnet. Die Gesamtzahl der INR-Messungen betrug 2 865, wobei 2 072 auf Patienten im Selbstmanagement und 793 auf die Hausarztgruppe entfielen. Die Werte lagen bei Patienten im Selbstmanagement mit 67,8% im Vergleich zur Hausarztgruppe mit 58,5% signifikant häufiger (p=0,0061) im Zielbereich. Bezüglich der Verweildauer im therapeutischen Bereich bestand zwar ein Trend zugunsten der Selbstmanagement-Gruppe, jedoch kein signifikanter Unterschied (178,8±126 Tage vs. 155,9±118,4 Tage). In der Selbstmanagement- Gruppe traten zwei schwere Blutungen, in der Hausarztgruppe ein thromboembolisches Ereignis auf.

Schlussfolgerung

Die Therapieüberwachung der oralen Antikoagulation durch das INR-Selbstmanagement ist bei Patienten mit Vorhofflimmern der Betreuung durch den Hausarzt nicht unterlegen.

Schlüsselwörter

Antikoagulation INR-Selbstmanagement Vorhofflimmern 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Atrial fibrillation investigators (1994) Risk factors for stroke and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation; analysis of pooled data from five randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 154:1449–1457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Butchart EG, Payne N, Li H-H, Buchan K, Mandana K, Grunkemeier GL (2002) Better anticoagulation control improves survival after valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 123:715–723Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carlsson J, Miketic S, Flicker E, Erdogan A, Haun S, Cuneo A, Tebbe U (2002) Neurologische Ereignisse bei Patienten mit Vorhofflimmern: Outcome und Präventionspraxis. Z Kardiol 89:1090–1097Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Copland M, Walker ID, Tait RC (2001) Oral Anticoagulation and Hemorrhagic Complications in an Elderly Population With Atrial Fibrillation. Arch of Int Med 161:2125–2128Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    EAFT study group (1993) Secondary prevention in non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation after transient ischemic attack or minor stroke. Lancet 342:1255–1262Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    European Atrial Fibrillation Study Group (1995) Optimal oral anticoagulation therapy with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation and recent cerebral ischemia. New Engl J Med 333:5–10Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fang MC, Stafford RS, Ruskin JN, Singer DE (2004) National Trends in Antiarrhythmic and Antithrombotic Medication Use in Atrial Fibrillation. Arch Intern Med 164:55–60Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Go AS, Hylek EM, Phillips KA, Chang Y, Henault LE, Selby JV, Singer DE (2001) Prevalence of diagnosed atrial fibrillation in adults: national implications for rhythm management and stroke prevention: the AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study. JAMA 285:2370–2375Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heidinger KS, Bernardo A, Taborski U, Mueller-Berghaus G (2000) Clinical outcome of self-management of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation or deep vein thrombosis. Thromb Res 98:287–293Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hylek EM, Go AS, Chang Y, Jensvold NG, Henault LE, Selby JV, Singer DE (2003) Effect of Intensity of Oral Anticoagulation on Stroke Severity and Mortality in Atrial Fibrillation. N Engl J Med 349:1019–1026CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hylek EM, Skates SJ, Sheehan MA, Singer DE (1996) An analysis of the lowest effective intensity of prophylactic anticoagulation for patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 335:540–546Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Israel CW, Gronefeld G, Ehrlich JR, Li YG, Hohnloser SH (2004) Long-term risk of recurrent atrial fibrillation as documented by an implantable monitoring device: implications for optimal patient care. J Am Coll Cardiol 43:47–52Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kannel WB, Abbort RD, Savage DD, McNamara PM (1983) Coronary heart disease and atrial fibrillation: The Framingham study. Am Heart J 106:389–396Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Körtke H, Körfer R (2001) International normalized ratio self-management after mechanical heart valve replacement: is an early start advantageous? Ann Thorac Surg 72:44–48Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Man-Son-Hing M, Nichol G, Lau A, Laupacis A (1999) Choosing antithrombotic therapy for elderly patients with atrial fibrillation who are at risk for falls. Arch Intern Med 159:677–685Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Palareti G, Leali N, Coccheri S, Poggi M, Manotti C, D’Angelo A, Pengo V, Erba N, Moia M, Ciavarella N, Devoto G, Berrettini M, Musolesi S, on behalf of the Italian Study on Complications of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy (1996) Bleeding complications of oral anticoagulant treatment: an inception-cohort, prospective collaborative study (ISCOAT). Lancet 348:423–428CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rossol-Haseroth K, Vogel CU, Reinecke F, Burkhardt H, Heun-Letsch Ch, Wieth B, Peiter A, Heinrich U, Jorg I, Voller H, Kemkes-Matthes B, Nordt TK, Diener HC, Gehrlein M, Gladisch R, Wehling M, Harenberg J (2002) Empfehlungen zur Thromboembolieprophylaxe bei internistischen Patienten im Alter. Internist 43:1134–1147Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Saxena R, Lewis S, Berge E, Sandercock PAG, Koudstaal PJ; for the International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group (2001) Risk of Early Death and Recurrent Stroke and Effect of Heparin in 3169 Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke and Atrial Fibrillation in the International Stroke Trial. Stroke 32:2333–2337Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Scott PA, Pancioli AM, Davis LA, Frederiksen SM, Eckman J (2002) Prevalence of atrial fibrillation and antithrombotic prophylaxis in emergency department patients. Stroke 33:2664–2669CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sudlow M, Thomson R, Thwaites B, Rodgers H, Kenny RA (1998) Prevalence of atrial fibrillation and eligibility for anticoagulants in the community. Lancet 352:1167–1171Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Van der Meer FJM, Rosendaal FR, Vandenbroucke JP, Briet E (1996) Assessment of a bleeding risk index in two cohorts of patients treated with oral anticoagulants. Thromb Haemost 76:12–16Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Van Gelder IC, Hagens VE, Bosker HA, Kingma JH, Kamp O, Kingma T, Said SA, Darmanata JI, Timmermans AJM, Tijssen JGP, Crijns HJGM for the Rate Control versus Electrical Cardioversion for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Study Group (2002) A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 347:1834–1840CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Van Swieten JC, Kondstaal PJ, Visser MC, Schonten HJA, van Gijn J (1988) Interobserver aggreement in stroke patients. Stroke 19:604–607PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Völler H, Glatz J, Taborski U, Bernardo A, Dovifat C, Burkard G, Heidinger K (2000) für die SMAAF-Studiengruppe (2000) Hintergrund und Prüfplan der Studie zum Selbstmanagement der Antikoagulation bei Patienten mit nichtvalvulärem Vorhofflimmern (SMAAF-Studie). Z Kardiol 89:284–288Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Völler H, Dovifat C, Glatz J (2001) Home management of anticoagulation. Eur Heart J Suppl (Suppl Q):Q44–Q49Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Völler H, Dovifat C, Glatz J, Krüger-Streller B, Tamkus A, Wegscheider K (2003) Lower INR Variability through Self management of Oral Anticoagulation Annals of Hematology (Suppl 1)82:306Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Watzke HH, Forberg E, Svolba G, Jimenez-Boj E, Krinninger B (2000) A prospective controlled trial comparing weekly self-testing and self-dosing with the standard management of patients on stable oral anticoagulation. Thromb Haemost 83:661–665Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Whittle J, Wickenheiser L, Venditti LN (1997) Is warfarin underused in the treatment of elderly persons with atrial fibrillation? Arch Intern Med 157:441–445Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wolf PA, Abbott RD, Kannel WB (1991) Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham study. Stroke 22:983–988Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, Domanski MJ, Rosenberg Y, Schron EB, Kellen JC, Greene HL, Mickel MC, Dalquist JE, Corley SD, Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Investigators (2002) A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 347:1825–1833PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steinkopff Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Völler
    • 1
  • J. Glatz
    • 1
  • U. Taborski
    • 3
  • A. Bernardo
    • 4
  • C. Dovifat
    • 1
  • K. Heidinger
    • 2
  1. 1.Klinik am See, Fachklinik für Innere Medizin, KardiologieRüdersdorf/BerlinGermany
  2. 2.Inst. für Klinische Immunologie und TransfusionsmedizinGießenGermany
  3. 3.Deutsche Gesellschaft für HumanplasmaLudwigshafenGermany
  4. 4.Klinik Gais Fachklinik für kardiale und psychosomatische Rehabilitation AGGaisSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations