Studies have concluded that telephone-based management of warfarin is an effective alternative to in-office management. High rates of patient and physician satisfaction have been reported with telephone-based monitoring. Proposed benefits of telephone-based monitoring include time- and cost savings for patients and healthcare providers alike as well as increased access to care for those patients who have difficulty making in-office appointments. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of telephone versus office-based management of warfarin on extreme INR values. A retrospective cohort study was conducted to assess outcomes of patients receiving warfarin managed either by telephone or in-office appointments. The primary endpoint of the study was the frequency of extreme INR values, defined as an INR ≤1.5 or ≥4.5. A total of 110 patients were evaluated; subjects were distributed 2:1 between the in-office and telephone groups. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Subjects followed via telephone had a twofold increase in the incidence of extreme INR values compared to the patients followed in-office (15.18 vs. 7.98 %; p < 0.0001). Overall TTR was similar between groups (85.39 vs. 80.38 %, p = 0.1171). There was no difference between the two groups in the incidence of major bleeding events (2.67 vs. 0 %, p = 1.00), thromboembolic events (8 vs. 0 %, p = 0.1740), or hospitalizations related to anticoagulation therapy (6.67 vs. 0 %, p = 0.1758). Patients monitored via telephone had a higher incidence of extreme INR values than patients followed in-office, which may lead to an increased incidence of adverse outcomes in the long-term. Well-designed, prospective studies are needed to confirm such findings.

Warfarin is an anticoagulant medication that is challenging to manage. Dabigatran has been approved by the FDA for stroke and systemic embolism prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation as an alternative to warfarin. Dabigatran does not require routine monitoring, has an established dose, and lacks many of the drug, herbal, and food interactions that afflict warfarin. To evaluate patients' satisfaction with their current warfarin treatment and their opinion on switching to a newly marketed medication (dabigatran) through a brief survey. Two separate surveys were administered to (1) evaluate the patients' opinion of their warfarin therapy and (2) evaluate their thoughts on switching to a newer anticoagulant. Responses were recorded on a rating scale of 1-5; 1 being the least and 5 being the highest. Study was conducted at the Georgia Regents Health System (GRHS) pharmacy-based anticoagulation clinic. Two hundred sixty patients on warfarin treatment were enrolled. Patients expressed high satisfaction with warfarin treatment (4.7 ± 0.78). However, a vast majority of the patients were willing to switch to an agent that: requires less frequent follow-up visits (3.9 ± 1.35); lacks interaction with food and/or beverage (4.1 ± 1.25); is as efficacious as warfarin (3.7 ± 1.38). Patients expressed that out-of-pocket cost would be a major barrier to switch to this new medication (1.3 ± 0.58). Patients are satisfied with their warfarin treatment but willing to consider a new anticoagulant. Cost was highlighted as the most significant barrier. Efficacy, dietary freedom and less frequent visits are the major factors affecting the patients' decision.

No abstract

No abstract