Healthcare resource utilization and costs after initiating direct-acting oral anticoagulants or low molecular weight heparins in patients with venous thromboembolism.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Vascular Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-06 DOI:10.1177/1358863X241305097
Godwin Okoye, Kenechukwu C Ben-Umeh, Anton Lv Avanceña, Eberechukwu Onukwugha
{"title":"Healthcare resource utilization and costs after initiating direct-acting oral anticoagulants or low molecular weight heparins in patients with venous thromboembolism.","authors":"Godwin Okoye, Kenechukwu C Ben-Umeh, Anton Lv Avanceña, Eberechukwu Onukwugha","doi":"10.1177/1358863X241305097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Venous thromboembolism (VTE) can lead to significant healthcare resource utilization (HcRU) and costs. First-line treatments such as direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) are utilized for VTE management. There are limited observational studies to determine which first-line drug for VTE is associated with lower HcRU and cost. Therefore, we sought to compare HcRU and costs of commercially insured patients with VTE who initiated DOAC or LMWH in the US.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We utilized Merative MarketScan Research Database (2016-2021) to identify adults initiating DOAC or LMWH for VTE. Baseline measures were assessed 12 months prior to the index date of drug initiation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control confounding. For HcRU, logistic regression was used to model emergency room and inpatient visits and the negative binomial count model was used for outpatient visits. The average marginal effect for total healthcare cost comparing DOAC with LMWH users was estimated using a generalized linear model. HcRU and costs were evaluated for 12 months posttreatment initiation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DOAC users had lower odds of inpatient visits (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.59), emergency room visits (aOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99), and outpatient visits (adjusted incident rate ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.54) in comparison to LMWH users. DOAC users had lower total healthcare costs of -$9573 (95% CI -$11,149 to -$7997) (US dollars).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This cohort study suggests that DOAC use is associated with fewer inpatient, outpatient, and emergency room visits, and lower healthcare costs compared to LMWH use for VTE management.</p>","PeriodicalId":23604,"journal":{"name":"Vascular Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1358863X241305097"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1358863X241305097","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) can lead to significant healthcare resource utilization (HcRU) and costs. First-line treatments such as direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) are utilized for VTE management. There are limited observational studies to determine which first-line drug for VTE is associated with lower HcRU and cost. Therefore, we sought to compare HcRU and costs of commercially insured patients with VTE who initiated DOAC or LMWH in the US.

Methods: We utilized Merative MarketScan Research Database (2016-2021) to identify adults initiating DOAC or LMWH for VTE. Baseline measures were assessed 12 months prior to the index date of drug initiation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control confounding. For HcRU, logistic regression was used to model emergency room and inpatient visits and the negative binomial count model was used for outpatient visits. The average marginal effect for total healthcare cost comparing DOAC with LMWH users was estimated using a generalized linear model. HcRU and costs were evaluated for 12 months posttreatment initiation.

Results: DOAC users had lower odds of inpatient visits (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.59), emergency room visits (aOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99), and outpatient visits (adjusted incident rate ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.54) in comparison to LMWH users. DOAC users had lower total healthcare costs of -$9573 (95% CI -$11,149 to -$7997) (US dollars).

Conclusion: This cohort study suggests that DOAC use is associated with fewer inpatient, outpatient, and emergency room visits, and lower healthcare costs compared to LMWH use for VTE management.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Vascular Medicine
Vascular Medicine 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.70%
发文量
158
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The premier, ISI-ranked journal of vascular medicine. Integrates the latest research in vascular biology with advancements for the practice of vascular medicine and vascular surgery. It features original research and reviews on vascular biology, epidemiology, diagnosis, medical treatment and interventions for vascular disease. A member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Healthcare resource utilization and costs after initiating direct-acting oral anticoagulants or low molecular weight heparins in patients with venous thromboembolism. Images in Vascular Medicine: Naked and clothed right coronary artery in aortic intramural hematoma. Interaction of anxiety symptoms with peripheral artery disease treatment strategies and health status outcomes. Vascular Disease Patient Information Page: Renal artery stenosis. Platelet pals: How blood cells shape the future of the aorta.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1