Descriptive analysis of the process and quality of oral anticoagulation management in real-life practice in patients with chronic non-valvular atrial fibrillation: the international study of anticoagulation management (ISAM)
- 721 Downloads
Expert oral anticoagulation management is the key to good outcomes and is performed variably in different health care systems throughout the world. We set out to assess the quality of anticoagulation management in five countries in patients receiving vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for stroke prophylaxis in chronic non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), and to compare the anticoagulation management practices in these countries.
Methods and results
This was a retrospective, multi-centre cohort study in the United States, Canada, France, Italy, and Spain. About 1,511 patients were randomly recruited from representative practices (routine medical care (RMC) in the US, Canada, and France; anticoagulation clinics in Italy and Spain) and data pertaining to their oral anticoagulation care were abstracted from their medical records. The predominant anticoagulant in use was warfarin in the US, Canada, and Italy; acenocoumarol in Spain; and fluindione in France. Documentation of care was poor in the US, Canada, and France, countries where RMC was studied. Percent INRs or time-in-therapeutic range was greater in the two anticoagulation clinic samples compared with the RMC samples.
Oral anticoagulation care varies considerably from country to country. Findings suggest that anticoagulation clinic care (ACC) may provide better outcomes as assessed by international normalized ratio (INR) time-in-range. Physicians tend to under treat more than over treat. Finally, documentation of care is often inadequate.
Condensed Abstract Oral anticoagulation management (routine medical care or anticoagulation clinic care) was retrospectively assessed in 5 countries using a uniform, structured assessment tool. Major management differences were detected, especially between anticoagulation clinic care and routine care. Documentation was often a problem in the latter setting. Less time in therapeutic INR range was noted in routine medical care. Findings suggest that anticoagulation clinic care may provide better outcomes as assessed by international normalized ratio (INR) time-in-range. Physicians tend to under treat more than over treat. Finally, documentation of care is often inadequate.
KeywordsOral anticoagulation Warfarin International normalized ratio Atrial fibrillation
We express our sincere thanks to the participating physicians and clinics and to the local study co-ordinators (Ole Hauch and Gail Wygant, USA; Amin Haiderali, Canada; Hervé Lamarque and Maud Woessner, France; Alessandra Cheli and Cristina Negrini, Italy; Rosario Marazuela, Spain), and Jonas Carlsson for statistical support. This study was funded by AstraZeneca.
- 6.Holm T, Lassen JF, Husted SE, Heickendorf L (1999) Identification and surveillance of patients on oral anticoagulant therapy in a large geographic area-use of laboratory information systems. Thromb Haemost 82(Suppl):S858–S859Google Scholar
- 10.Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo. Catálogo Nacional de Hospitales (1999) Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo y Boletín Oficial del Estado; 2001Google Scholar
- 11.Rosendaal FR, Cannegieter SC, van der Meer FJM, Briet E (1993) A method to determine the optimal intensity of oral anticoagulant therapy. Thromb Hemost 69:236–239Google Scholar
- 13.Pengo VC, Legnani C, Noventa F, Palareti G, ISCOAT Study Group (2001) Oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation and risk of bleeding: a multicenter inception cohort study. Thromb Haemost 85:418–422Google Scholar