Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients receiving oral anticoagulants for the treatment of non-valvular atrial fibrillation
Background: Frequent monitoring of patients declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, harming patients with chronic diseases who critically needed correct monitoring. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with non -valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) receiving treatment with vita...
| Autores: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Barcelona |
| Repositorio: | Dipòsit Digital de la UB |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/212246 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/2445/212246 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Pandèmia de COVID-19, 2020- Malalties cardiovasculars COVID-19 Pandemic, 2020- Cardiovascular diseases |
| Sumario: | Background: Frequent monitoring of patients declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, harming patients with chronic diseases who critically needed correct monitoring. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with non -valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) receiving treatment with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) or non -vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) in clinical practice in Spain. Methods: This observational, retrospective study analyzed prevalent patients treated with NOAC/VKA on 14/03/ 2019 (pre-COVID-19 period) and 14/03/2020 (COVID-19 period), who were followed up to 12 months. The study also considered incident patients who started treatment with NOAC/VKA between 15/03/2019 and 13/ 03/2020 (pre-COVID-19 period) and from 15/03/2020 to 13/03/2021 (COVID-19 period). Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, effectiveness, treatment patterns, and healthcare resource utilization were considered. Results: Prevalent patients amounted to 12,336 and 13,342 patients, whereas 1,612 and 1,602 incident patients were included in the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods, respectively. Prevalent patients treated with VKA had more strokes, thromboembolism, and major bleeding compared to those receiving NOAC, particularly during the COVID-19 period. NOAC patients had a 12 % lower risk of death than those on treatment with VKA (Hazard ratio = 0.88 [95 % CI: 0.81 - 0.95], p = 0.033). In addition, VKA patients were less persistent after 12 months than NOAC patients (pre-COVID-19 period: 52.1 % vs. 78.9 %, p < 0.001; COVID-19 period: 49.2 % vs. 80.3 %, p < 0.001), and required more healthcare visits and hospitalizations than those on treatment with NOAC. Conclusion: Compared to VKA, NOAC seems to have reduced the incidence of severe events and the use of healthcare resources for NVAF, particularly during the pandemic. |
|---|