The role of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in practice has been given extensive consideration recently, albeit largely from the clinician's perspective. However, the effectiveness and safety of using anticoagulants is highly dependent on the patient's ability to manage and take these complex, high-risk medicines. This structured narrative review explores the published literature to identify the factors underpinning patients' non-adherence to anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation (AF), and subsequently contemplates to what extent the DOACs might overcome the known challenges with traditional warfarin therapy. This review comprised a two-tier search of various databases and search platforms (CINAHL, Cochrane, Current Contents Connect, EMBASE, MEDLINE Ovid, EBSCO, PubMed, Google, Google Scholar) to yield 47 articles reporting patients perspectives on, and patients adherence to, anticoagulant therapy. The findings from the literature were synthesised under five interacting dimensions of adherence: therapy-related factors, patient-related factors, condition-related factors, social-economic factors and health system factors. Factors negatively affecting patients' day-to-day lives (especially regular therapeutic drug monitoring, dose adjustments, dietary considerations) predominantly underpin a patient's reluctance to take warfarin therapy, leading to non-adherence. Other patient-related factors underpinning non-adherence include patients' perceptions and knowledge about the purpose of anticoagulation; understanding of the risks and benefits of therapy; socioeconomic status; and expectations of care from health professionals. In considering these findings, it is apparent that the DOACs may overcome some of the barriers to traditional warfarin therapy at least to an extent, particularly the need for regular monitoring, frequent dose adjustment and dietary considerations. However, their high cost, twice-daily dosing and gastrointestinal adverse effects may present additional challenges for patients and health systems. The review highlights the need to explicitly incorporate patients' perspectives in decision-making processes for anticoagulant selection, to obtain optimum adherence and treatment outcomes. Further studies should explore resources that can better engage patients in decision making around the selection of anticoagulant therapy.

BackgroundPsychiatric and somatic problems in young adulthood have been found to be main drivers of costs in individuals with childhood ADHD. However, knowledge of the patterns of healthcare utilization and costs of comorbidities in middle‐aged adults with newly diagnosed ADHD is very limited.MethodWe studied individuals born 1966–1978 (from the Swedish Total Population Register) with newly diagnosed ADHD between the ages of 30–45 years and individuals without ADHD matched on birthdate, birth county, and sex. Healthcare utilization and expenditure for psychiatric and somatic disorders were obtained over four years (two years pre‐ and post‐initial ADHD diagnosis).ResultsMiddle‐aged adults with newly diagnosed ADHD showed higher levels of healthcare utilization and costs (outpatient, inpatient, medications) for psychiatric and somatic comorbidities relative to adults without ADHD, both before and after the initial diagnosis. Females showed greater average group differences across the study period for medication prescriptions than males. Total incremental annual costs per capita were €2478.76 in adults with ADHD relative to those without, and costs were mainly driven by inpatient care. Psychiatric outpatient visits were statistically significantly higher the year before the ADHD diagnosis compared with two years before and after the diagnosis.ConclusionThis study demonstrates the substantial burden of psychiatric and somatic comorbidities in middle‐aged adults newly diagnosed with ADHD. Psychiatric outpatient visits peaked in the year leading up to the ADHD diagnosis. Findings further suggested that females with ADHD may seek more treatment for comorbidities than males, which may reflect a general female tendency.

The implied inclination of some resources towards particular anticoagulant therapies and imbalanced information about the importance of anticoagulation in AF might misinform and confuse patients. Patients' engagement in shared decision-making and adherence to medicines may be undermined by the suboptimal quality of information provided in the resources. Health professionals have an important role to play in referring patients to appropriate resources to enable patient engagement in shared decision-making when selecting treatment.

Background: To document antithrombotic utilization in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), particularly, recently approved NOACs (nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants) and warfarin; and identify factors predicting the use of NOACs versus warfarin. Methods: A retrospective audit was conducted in an Australian hospital. Data pertaining to inpatients diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AF) admitted between January and December 2014 were extracted. This included patient demographics, risk factors (stroke, bleeding), social history, medical conditions, medication history, medication safety issues, medication adherence, and antithrombotic prescribed at admission and discharge. Results: Among 199 patients reviewed, 84.0% were discharged on antithrombotics. Anticoagulants (± antiplatelets) were most frequently (52.0%) prescribed (two-thirds were prescribed warfarin, the remainder NOACs), followed by antiplatelets (33.0%). Among 41 patients receiving NOACs, 59.0% were prescribed rivaroxaban, 24.0% dabigatran, and 17.0% apixaban. Among patients aged 75 years and over, antiplatelets were most frequently used (37.0%), followed by warfarin (33.0%), then NOACs (14.0%). Compared with their younger counterparts, patients aged 75 years and over were significantly less likely to receive NOACs (14.0% versus 28.0%, p = 0.01). Among the 'most eligible' patients (Congestive Cardiac Failure, Hypertension (, Age ⩾ 75 years, Age= 65-74 years, Diabetes Mellitus, Stroke/ Transient Ischaemic Attack/ Thromboembolism, Vascular disease, Sex female[CHA 2 DS 2-VASc] score ⩾2 and no bleeding risk factors), 46.0% were not anticoagulated on discharge. Patients with anaemia (68.0% versus 86.0%, p = 0.04) or a history of bleeding (65.0% versus 87.0%, p = 0.01) were less likely to receive antithrombotics compared with those without these risk factors. Warfarin therapy was less frequently prescribed among patients with cognitive impairment compared with patients with no cognitive issues (12.0% versus 23.0%, p = 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression modelling identified that patients with renal impairment were 3.6 times more likely to receive warfarin compared with NOACs (odds ratio = 3.6, 95% confidence interval = 0.08-0.90, p = 0.03, 60.0% correctly predicted; Cox and Snell R 2 = 0.51, Nagelkerke R 2 = 0.69). Conclusion: Despite the availability of NOACs, warfarin remains a preferred treatment option, particularly among patients with renal impairment. The high proportion of eligible patients still being prescribed antiplatelet therapy or 'no therapy' needs to be addressed.

No abstract