Preoperative Management of Cardiovascular Medications: A Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI) Consensus Statement.

Cardiovascular conditions such as hypertension, arrhythmias, and heart failure are common in patients undergoing anesthesia for surgical or other procedures. Numerous guidelines from various specialty societies offer variable recommendations for the perioperative management of these medications. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement identified a need to provide multidisciplinary evidence-based recommendations for preoperative medication management. The society convened a group of 13 members with expertise in perioperative medicine and training in anesthesiology or internal medicine. The aim of this consensus effort is to provide perioperative clinicians with guidance on the management of cardiovascular medications commonly encountered during the preoperative evaluation. We used a modified Delphi process to establish consensus. Twenty-one classes of medications were identified: α-adrenergic receptor antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, ß-adrenoceptor blockers, calcium-channel blockers, centrally acting sympatholytic medications, direct-acting vasodilators, loop diuretics, thiazide diuretics, potassium-sparing diuretics, endothelin receptor antagonists, cardiac glycosides, nitrodilators, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, class III antiarrhythmic agents, potassium-channel openers, renin inhibitors, class I antiarrhythmic agents, sodium-channel blockers, and sodium glucose cotransportor-2 inhibitors. We provide recommendations for the management of these medications preoperatively.

Costs of hospital visits among patients with deep vein thrombosis treated with rivaroxaban and LMWH/warfarin.

BACKGROUND: For many years, the standard of care for patients diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) has been low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridging to an oral Vitamin-K antagonist (VKA). The availability of new non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOAC) agents as monotherapy may reduce the likelihood of hospitalization for DVT patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare hospital visit costs of DVT patients treated with rivaroxaban and LMWH/warfarin. METHODS: A retrospective claim analysis was conducted using the MarketScan Hospital Drug Database for care provided between January 2011 and December 2013. Adult patients using rivaroxaban or LMWH/warfarin with a primary diagnosis of DVT during the first day of a hospital visit were identified (i.e., index hospital visit). Based on propensity-score methods, historical LMWH/warfarin patients (i.e., patients who received LMWH/warfarin before the approval of rivaroxaban) were matched 4:1 to rivaroxaban patients. The hospital-visit cost difference between these groups was evaluated for the index hospital visit, as well as for total hospital-visit costs (i.e., including index and subsequent hospital visit costs). RESULTS: All rivaroxaban users (n = 134) in the database were well-matched with four LMWH/warfarin users (n = 536). The mean hospital-visit costs were $5257 for the rivaroxaban cohort and $6764 in the matched-cohort of patients using LMWH/warfarin. The $1508 cost difference was statistically significant between cohorts (95% CI = [-$2296; -$580]; p-value = 0.002). Total hospital-visit costs were lower for rivaroxaban compared to LMWH/warfarin users within 1, 2, 3, and 6 months after index visit (significantly lower within 1 and 3 months, p-values <0.05) LIMITATIONS: Limitations were inherent to administrative-claims data, completeness of baseline characteristics, adjustments restricted to observational factors, and lastly the sample size of the rivaroxaban cohort. CONCLUSION: The availability of rivaroxaban significantly reduced the costs of hospital visits in patients with DVT treated with rivaroxaban compared to LMWH/warfarin.

Research to real-world application: experts weigh in on the underuse of anticoagulants.

Although numerous studies have shown that anticoagulants can reduce the risk of stroke and thromboembolic events in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, they are underprescribed in the clinical setting. While standardized risk scoring assessments are recommended in treatment guidelines to determine when anticoagulant use may be appropriate, they are not widely used in the real-world clinical setting. Many factors contribute to anticoagulant underuse, including patient characteristics and comorbidities. Reluctance to prescribe an anticoagulant may also stem from concerns about bleeding or other perceived risks. In addition, physicians may be discouraged from prescribing anticoagulant therapy, particularly warfarin, if follow-up care and monitoring is potentially unfeasible. Patient fears of treatment and lack of access to the healthcare system also contribute to underuse. Increased awareness and education, medical therapy management programs, better care coordination, and improvements in monitoring and follow-up programs may help to increase the use of anticoagulant therapies in appropriate patients.

Delivery of optimized inpatient anticoagulation therapy: consensus statement from the anticoagulation forum.

OBJECTIVE: To provide recommendations for optimized anticoagulant therapy in the inpatient setting and outline broad elements that need to be in place for effective management of anticoagulant therapy in hospitalized patients; the guidelines are designed to promote optimization of patient clinical outcomes while minimizing the risks for potential anticoagulation-related errors and adverse events. DATA SOURCES: The medical literature was reviewed using MEDLINE (1946-January 2013), EMBASE (1980-January 2013), and PubMed (1947-January 2013) for topics and key words including, but not limited to, standards of practice, national guidelines, patient safety initiatives, and regulatory requirements pertaining to anticoagulant use in the inpatient setting. Non-English-language publications were excluded. Specific MeSH terms used include algorithms, anticoagulants/administration and dosage/adverse effects/therapeutic use, clinical protocols/standards, decision support systems, drug monitoring/methods, humans, inpatients, efficiency/ organizational, outcome and process assessment (health care), patient care team/organization and administration, program development/standards, quality improvement/organization and administration, thrombosis/ drug therapy, thrombosis/prevention and control, risk assessment/standards, patient safety/standards, and risk management/methods. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Because of this document's scope, the medical literature was searched using a variety of strategies. When possible, recommendations are supported by available evidence; however, because this paper deals with processes and systems of care, high-quality evidence (eg, controlled trials) is unavailable. In these cases, recommendations represent the consensus opinion of all authors and are endorsed by the Board of Directors of the Anticoagulation Forum, an organization dedicated to optimizing anticoagulation care. The board is composed of physicians, pharmacists, and nurses with demonstrated expertise and experience in the management of patients receiving anticoagulation therapy. DATA SYNTHESIS: Recommendations for delivering optimized inpatient anticoagulation therapy were developed collaboratively by the authors and are summarized in 8 key areas: (1) process, (2) accountability, (3) integration, (4) standards of practice, (5) provider education and competency, (6) patient education, (7) care transitions, and (8) outcomes. Recommendations are intended to inform the development of coordinated care systems containing elements with demonstrated benefit in improvement of anticoagulation therapy outcomes. Recommendations for delivering optimized inpatient anticoagulation therapy are intended to apply to all clinicians involved in the care of hospitalized patients receiving anticoagulation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulants are high-risk medications associated with a significant rate of medication errors among hospitalized patients. Several national organizations have introduced initiatives to reduce the likelihood of patient harm associated with the use of anticoagulants. Health care organizations are under increasing pressure to develop systems to ensure the safe and effective use of anticoagulants in the inpatient setting. This document provides consensus guidelines for anticoagulant therapy in the inpatient setting and serves as a companion document to prior guidelines relevant for outpatients.

Appropriate VTE prophylaxis is associated with lower direct medical costs.

PURPOSE: To calculate and compare the direct medical costs of guideline-recommended prophylaxis with prophylaxis that does not fully adhere with guideline recommendations in a large, real-world population. METHODS: Discharge records were retrieved from the US Premier Perspective™ database (January 2003-December 2003) for patients aged≥40 years with a primary diagnosis of cancer, chronic heart failure, lung disease, or severe infectious disease who received some form of thromboprophylaxis. Univariate analysis and multivariate regression modeling were performed to compare direct medical costs between discharges who received appropriate prophylaxis (correct type, dose, and duration based on sixth edition American College of Chest Physicians [ACCP] recommendations) and partial prophylaxis (not in full accordance with ACCP recommendations). Market segmentation analysis was used to compare costs stratified by hospital and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 683 005 discharges included, 148,171 (21.7%) received appropriate prophylaxis and 534,834 (78.3%) received partial prophylaxis. The total direct unadjusted costs were $15,439 in the appropriate prophylaxis group and $17,763 in the partial prophylaxis group. After adjustment, mean adjusted total costs per discharge were lower for those receiving appropriate prophylaxis ($11,713; 95% confidence interval [CI], $11,675-$11,753) compared with partial prophylaxis ($13,369; 95% CI, $13,332-$13 406; P<0.01). Appropriate prophylaxis appeared to be associated with numerically lower unadjusted costs than partial prophylaxis, regardless of hospital size, rural/urban location, teaching status, and patient age and gender. CONCLUSION: This large, real-world analysis suggests that appropriate prophylaxis, in adherence with ACCP guidelines, is potentially cost-saving compared with partial prophylaxis in at-risk medical patients.

Delivery of optimized anticoagulant therapy: consensus statement from the Anticoagulation Forum.

OBJECTIVE: To provide recommendations, policies, and procedures pertaining to the provision of optimized anticoagulation therapy designed to achieve desired clinical endpoints while minimizing the risk of anticoagulant-related adverse outcomes (principally bleeding and thrombosis). STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Due to this document's scope, the medical literature was searched using a variety of strategies. When possible, recommendations are supported by available evidence; however, because this paper deals with processes and systems of care, high-quality evidence (eg, controlled trials) is unavailable. In these cases, recommendations represent the consensus opinion of all authors who constitute the Board of Directors of The Anticoagulation Forum, an organization dedicated to optimizing anticoagulation care. The Board is composed of physicians, pharmacists, and nurses with demonstrated expertise and significant collective experience in the management of patients receiving anticoagulation therapy. DATA SYNTHESIS: Recommendations for delivering optimized anticoagulation therapy were developed collaboratively by the authors and are summarized in 9 key areas: (I) Qualifications of Personnel, (II) Supervision, (III) Care Management and Coordination, (IV) Documentation, (V) Patient Education, (VI) Patient Selection and Assessment, (VII) Laboratory Monitoring, (VIII) Initiation and Stabilization of Warfarin Therapy, and (IX) Maintenance of Therapy. Recommendations are intended to inform the development of care systems containing elements with demonstrated benefit in improvement of anticoagulation therapy outcomes. Recommendations for delivering optimized anticoagulation therapy are intended to apply to all clinicians involved in the care of outpatients receiving anticoagulation therapy, regardless of the structure and setting in which that care is delivered. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy, although potentially life-saving, has inherent risks. Whether a patient is managed in a solo practice or a specialized anticoagulation management service, a systematic approach to the key elements outlined herein will reduce the likelihood of adverse events. The need for continued research to validate optimal practices for managing anticoagulation therapy is acknowledged.

Assessment of venous thromboembolism risk and the benefits of thromboprophylaxis in medical patients.

Hospitalized patients with acute medical conditions are at significant risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE): approximately 10-30% of general medical patients may develop deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, and the latter is a leading contributor to deaths in hospital. Despite consensus-group recommendations that at-risk medical patients should receive thromboprophylaxis, there is currently no consensus as to which patients are at risk, and many patients may not receive appropriate thromboprophylaxis. This paper reviews evidence for the risk of VTE associated with different medical conditions and risk factors, and presents a risk-assessment model for risk stratification in medical patients. Medical conditions associated with a moderate to high risk of VTE include cardiac disease, cancer, respiratory disease, inflammatory bowel disease, and infectious diseases. Importantly, analyses of data from the MEDENOX study show that thromboprophylaxis significantly reduces the risk of VTE in these patient subgroups. Risk factors in medical patients include a history of VTE, history of malignancy, increasing age, thrombophilia, prolonged immobility, and obesity. These medical conditions and risk factors are included in a risk-assessment model which is hoped will provide a simple means of assisting clinicians in deciding whether thromboprophylaxis should be used in an individual patient.