ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is ambiguity whether frail patients with atrial fibrillation managed with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) should be switched to a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC). METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled superiority trial. Older patients with atrial fibrillation living with frailty (≥75 years of age plus a Groningen Frailty Indicator score ≥3) were randomly assigned to switch from international normalized ratio-guided VKA treatment to an NOAC or to continued VKA treatment. Patients with a glomerular filtration rate <30 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 or with valvular atrial fibrillation were excluded. Follow-up was 12 months. The cause-specific hazard ratio was calculated for occurrence of the primary outcome that was a major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding complication, whichever came first, accounting for death as a competing risk. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes included thromboembolic events. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and June 2022, a total of 2621 patients were screened for eligibility and 1330 patients were randomly assigned (mean age 83 years, median Groningen Frailty Indicator score 4). After randomization, 6 patients in the switch-to-NOAC arm and 1 patient in the continue-with-VKA arm were excluded due to the presence of exclusion criteria, leaving 662 patients switched from a VKA to an NOAC and 661 patients continued VKAs in the intention-to-treat population. After 163 primary outcome events (101 in the switch arm, 62 in the continue arm), the trial was stopped for futility according to a prespecified futility analysis. The hazard ratio for our primary outcome was 1.69 (95% CI, 1.23-2.32). The hazard ratio for thromboembolic events was 1.26 (95% CI, 0.60-2.61). CONCLUSIONS: Switching international normalized ratio-guided VKA treatment to an NOAC in frail older patients with atrial fibrillation was associated with more bleeding complications compared with continuing VKA treatment, without an associated reduction in thromboembolic complications. REGISTRATION: URL: https://eudract.ema.europa.eu; Unique identifier: 2017-000393-11. URL: https://eudract.ema.europa.eu; Unique identifier: 6721 (FRAIL-AF study).
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Frailty , Stroke , Thromboembolism , Humans , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Atrial Fibrillation/complications , Frail Elderly , Frailty/diagnosis , Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Thromboembolism/etiology , Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Vitamin K , Administration, Oral , Stroke/etiologyABSTRACT
AIMS: Risk stratification is used for decisions regarding need for imaging in patients with clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim was to develop a clinical prediction model that provides an individualized, accurate probability estimate for the presence of acute PE in patients with suspected disease based on readily available clinical items and D-dimer concentrations. METHODS AND RESULTS: An individual patient data meta-analysis was performed based on sixteen cross-sectional or prospective studies with data from 28 305 adult patients with clinically suspected PE from various clinical settings, including primary care, emergency care, hospitalized and nursing home patients. A multilevel logistic regression model was built and validated including ten a priori defined objective candidate predictors to predict objectively confirmed PE at baseline or venous thromboembolism (VTE) during follow-up of 30 to 90 days. Multiple imputation was used for missing data. Backward elimination was performed with a P-value <0.10. Discrimination (c-statistic with 95% confidence intervals [CI] and prediction intervals [PI]) and calibration (outcome:expected [O:E] ratio and calibration plot) were evaluated based on internal-external cross-validation. The accuracy of the model was subsequently compared with algorithms based on the Wells score and D-dimer testing. The final model included age (in years), sex, previous VTE, recent surgery or immobilization, haemoptysis, cancer, clinical signs of deep vein thrombosis, inpatient status, D-dimer (in µg/L), and an interaction term between age and D-dimer. The pooled c-statistic was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85-0.89; 95% PI, 0.77-0.93) and overall calibration was very good (pooled O:E ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.87-1.14; 95% PI, 0.55-1.79). The model slightly overestimated VTE probability in the lower range of estimated probabilities. Discrimination of the current model in the validation data sets was better than that of the Wells score combined with a D-dimer threshold based on age (c-statistic 0.73; 95% CI, 0.70-0.75) or structured clinical pretest probability (c-statistic 0.79; 95% CI, 0.76-0.81). CONCLUSION: The present model provides an absolute, individualized probability of PE presence in a broad population of patients with suspected PE, with very good discrimination and calibration. Its clinical utility needs to be evaluated in a prospective management or impact study. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID 89366.
Subject(s)
Pulmonary Embolism , Venous Thromboembolism , Adult , Humans , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Models, Statistical , Prognosis , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysisABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is reported to have long-term effects on cardiovascular health and physical functioning, even in the nonhospitalized population. The physiological mechanisms underlying these long-term consequences are however less well described. We compared cardiovascular risk factors, arterial stiffness, and physical functioning in nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19, at a median of 6 mo postinfection, versus age- and sex-matched controls. Cardiovascular risk was assessed using blood pressure and biomarker concentrations (amino-terminal pro-B-type-natriuretic-peptide, high-sensitive cardiac troponin I, C-reactive protein), and arterial stiffness was assessed using carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity. Physical functioning was evaluated using accelerometry, handgrip strength, gait speed and questionnaires on fatigue, perceived general health status, and health-related quality of life (hrQoL). We included 101 former patients with COVID-19 (aged 59 [interquartile range, 55-65] yr, 58% male) and 101 controls. At 175 [126-235] days postinfection, 32% of the COVID-19 group reported residual symptoms, notably fatigue, and 7% required post-COVID-19 care. We found no differences in blood pressure, biomarker concentrations, or arterial stiffness between both groups. Former patients with COVID-19 showed a higher handgrip strength (43 [33-52] vs. 38 [30-48] kg, P = 0.004) and less sleeping time (8.8 [7.7-9.4] vs. 9.8 [8.9-10.3] h/day, P < 0.001) and reported fatigue more often than controls. Accelerometry-based habitual physical activity levels, gait speed, perception of general health status, and hrQoL were not different between groups. In conclusion, one in three nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 reports residual symptoms at a median of 6 mo postinfection, but we were unable to relate these symptoms to increases in cardiovascular risk factors, arterial stiffness, or physical dysfunction.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We examined cardiovascular and physical functioning outcomes in nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19, at a median of 6 mo postinfection. When compared with matched controls, minor differences in physical functioning were found, but objective measures of cardiovascular risk and arterial stiffness did not differ between groups. However, one in three former patients with COVID-19 reported residual symptoms, notably fatigue. Follow-up studies should investigate the origins of residual symptoms and their long-term consequences in former, nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vascular Stiffness , Humans , Male , Female , Pulse Wave Analysis , Quality of Life , Hand Strength , Vascular Stiffness/physiology , Health Status , Fatigue , BiomarkersABSTRACT
AIM: To investigate the effects of off-label non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC) dose reduction compared with on-label standard dosing in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients in routine care. METHODS: Population-based cohort study using data from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink, comparing adults with non-valvular AF receiving an off-label reduced NOAC dose to patients receiving an on-label standard dose. Outcomes were ischaemic stroke, major/non-major bleeding and mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting and inverse probability of censoring weighting on the propensity score were applied to adjust for confounding and informative censoring. RESULTS: Off-label dose reduction occurred in 2466 patients (8.0%), compared with 18 108 (58.5%) on-label standard-dose users. Median age was 80 years (interquartile range [IQR] 73.0-86.0) versus 72 years (IQR 66-78), respectively. Incidence rates were higher in the off-label dose reduction group compared to the on-label standard dose group, for ischaemic stroke (0.94 vs 0.70 per 100 person years), major bleeding (1.48 vs 0.83), non-major bleeding (6.78 vs 6.16) and mortality (10.12 vs 3.72). Adjusted analyses resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-1.60) for ischaemic stroke, 0.88 (95% CI 0.57-1.35) for major bleeding, 0.81 (95% CI 0.67-0.98) for non-major bleeding and 1.34 (95% CI 1.12-1.61) for mortality. CONCLUSION: In this large population-based study, the hazards for ischaemic stroke and major bleeding were low, and similar in AF patients receiving an off-label reduced NOAC dose compared with on-label standard dose users, while non-major bleeding risk appeared to be lower and mortality risk higher. Caution towards prescribing an off-label reduced NOAC dose is therefore required.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Brain Ischemia , Ischemic Stroke , Stroke , Humans , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants , Atrial Fibrillation/complications , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Atrial Fibrillation/chemically induced , Stroke/epidemiology , Stroke/etiology , Stroke/prevention & control , Cohort Studies , Brain Ischemia/epidemiology , Brain Ischemia/prevention & control , Brain Ischemia/chemically induced , Off-Label Use , Drug Tapering , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Ischemic Stroke/chemically induced , Ischemic Stroke/complications , Ischemic Stroke/drug therapy , Administration, OralABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: How diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) perform in relevant patient subgroups defined by sex, age, cancer, and previous venous thromboembolism (VTE) is unknown. PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficiency of the Wells and revised Geneva scores combined with fixed and adapted D-dimer thresholds, as well as the YEARS algorithm, for ruling out acute PE in these subgroups. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE from 1 January 1995 until 1 January 2021. STUDY SELECTION: 16 studies assessing at least 1 diagnostic strategy. DATA EXTRACTION: Individual-patient data from 20 553 patients. DATA SYNTHESIS: Safety was defined as the diagnostic failure rate (the predicted 3-month VTE incidence after exclusion of PE without imaging at baseline). Efficiency was defined as the proportion of individuals classified by the strategy as "PE considered excluded" without imaging tests. Across all strategies, efficiency was highest in patients younger than 40 years (47% to 68%) and lowest in patients aged 80 years or older (6.0% to 23%) or patients with cancer (9.6% to 26%). However, efficiency improved considerably in these subgroups when pretest probability-dependent D-dimer thresholds were applied. Predicted failure rates were highest for strategies with adapted D-dimer thresholds, with failure rates varying between 2% and 4% in the predefined patient subgroups. LIMITATIONS: Between-study differences in scoring predictor items and D-dimer assays, as well as the presence of differential verification bias, in particular for classifying fatal events and subsegmental PE cases, all of which may have led to an overestimation of the predicted failure rates of adapted D-dimer thresholds. CONCLUSION: Overall, all strategies showed acceptable safety, with pretest probability-dependent D-dimer thresholds having not only the highest efficiency but also the highest predicted failure rate. From an efficiency perspective, this individual-patient data meta-analysis supports application of adapted D-dimer thresholds. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Dutch Research Council. (PROSPERO: CRD42018089366).
Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Pulmonary Embolism , Venous Thromboembolism , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products , Humans , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Probability , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The challenging clinical dilemma of detecting pulmonary embolism (PE) in suspected patients is encountered in a variety of healthcare settings. We hypothesized that the optimal diagnostic approach to detect these patients in terms of safety and efficiency depends on underlying PE prevalence, case mix, and physician experience, overall reflected by the type of setting where patients are initially assessed. The objective of this study was to assess the capability of ruling out PE by available diagnostic strategies across all possible settings. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a literature search (MEDLINE) followed by an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis (MA; 23 studies), including patients from self-referral emergency care (n = 12,612), primary healthcare clinics (n = 3,174), referred secondary care (n = 17,052), and hospitalized or nursing home patients (n = 2,410). Multilevel logistic regression was performed to evaluate diagnostic performance of the Wells and revised Geneva rules, both using fixed and adapted D-dimer thresholds to age or pretest probability (PTP), for the YEARS algorithm and for the Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC). All strategies were tested separately in each healthcare setting. Following studies done in this field, the primary diagnostic metrices estimated from the models were the "failure rate" of each strategy-i.e., the proportion of missed PE among patients categorized as "PE excluded" and "efficiency"-defined as the proportion of patients categorized as "PE excluded" among all patients. In self-referral emergency care, the PERC algorithm excludes PE in 21% of suspected patients at a failure rate of 1.12% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 to 1.70), whereas this increases to 6.01% (4.09 to 8.75) in referred patients to secondary care at an efficiency of 10%. In patients from primary healthcare and those referred to secondary care, strategies adjusting D-dimer to PTP are the most efficient (range: 43% to 62%) at a failure rate ranging between 0.25% and 3.06%, with higher failure rates observed in patients referred to secondary care. For this latter setting, strategies adjusting D-dimer to age are associated with a lower failure rate ranging between 0.65% and 0.81%, yet are also less efficient (range: 33% and 35%). For all strategies, failure rates are highest in hospitalized or nursing home patients, ranging between 1.68% and 5.13%, at an efficiency ranging between 15% and 30%. The main limitation of the primary analyses was that the diagnostic performance of each strategy was compared in different sets of studies since the availability of items used in each diagnostic strategy differed across included studies; however, sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were robust. CONCLUSIONS: The capability of safely and efficiently ruling out PE of available diagnostic strategies differs for different healthcare settings. The findings of this IPD MA help in determining the optimum diagnostic strategies for ruling out PE per healthcare setting, balancing the trade-off between failure rate and efficiency of each strategy.
Subject(s)
Data Interpretation, Statistical , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Pulmonary Embolism/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The long-term risk for major bleeding in patients receiving extended (beyond the initial 3 to 6 months) anticoagulant therapy for a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) is uncertain. PURPOSE: To determine the incidence of major bleeding during extended anticoagulation of up to 5 years among patients with a first unprovoked VTE, overall, and in clinically important subgroups. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 23 July 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies reporting major bleeding among patients with a first unprovoked VTE who were to receive oral anticoagulation for a minimum of 6 additional months after completing at least 3 months of initial anticoagulant treatment. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed study quality. Unpublished data required for analyses were obtained from authors of included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Among the 14 RCTs and 13 cohort studies included in the analysis, 9982 patients received a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and 7220 received a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). The incidence of major bleeding per 100 person-years was 1.74 events (95% CI, 1.34 to 2.20 events) with VKAs and 1.12 events (CI, 0.72 to 1.62 events) with DOACs. The 5-year cumulative incidence of major bleeding with VKAs was 6.3% (CI, 3.6% to 10.0%). Among patients receiving either a VKA or a DOAC, the incidence of major bleeding was statistically significantly higher among those who were older than 65 years or had creatinine clearance less than 50 mL/min, a history of bleeding, concomitant use of antiplatelet therapy, or a hemoglobin level less than 100 g/L. The case-fatality rate of major bleeding was 8.3% (CI, 5.1% to 12.2%) with VKAs and 9.7% (CI, 3.2% to 19.2%) with DOACs. LIMITATION: Data were insufficient to estimate incidence of major bleeding beyond 1 year of extended anticoagulation with DOACs. CONCLUSION: In patients with a first unprovoked VTE, the long-term risks and consequences of anticoagulant-related major bleeding are considerable. This information will help inform patient prognosis and guide decision making about treatment duration for unprovoked VTE. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (PROSPERO: CRD42019128597).
Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Administration, Oral , Age Factors , Aged , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Humans , Middle Aged , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
Glucocorticoid treatment increases venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. Whether this is due to the medication or the underlying disease, or affects the risk of VTE recurrence, has been difficult to determine. The aim of our present study was to quantify the risk for first and recurrent VTE associated with oral glucocorticoids use, considering the underlying disease. A total of 2547 patients with VTE from the Multiple Environmental and Genetic Assessment of Risk Factors for Venous Thrombosis (MEGA) study were linked to the Dutch Pharmaceutical Statistics register. The risk of first VTE during periods of exposure with oral glucocorticoids was estimated by the self-controlled case series method and that of recurrent VTE was examined in a cohort design. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) of first VTE in the period of glucocorticoid treatment was 3·51 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2·55-4·80]. This IRR was 2·53 (95% CI 1·10-5·72) in the week before treatment started, 5·28 (95% CI 2·89-9·53) in the first 7 days of treatment, remained elevated afterwards and decreased to 1·55 (95% CI 0·85-3·12) after 6 months, as compared to unexposed periods. The hazard ratio for recurrence was 2·72 (95% CI 1·64-4·78) in treatment periods as compared with no treatment. The increased risk of VTE associated with oral glucocorticoid treatment is due to a combined effect of the treatment and the underlying disease, remaining high during the first months of prescription.
Subject(s)
Glucocorticoids , Venous Thromboembolism , Administration, Oral , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Case-Control Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Glucocorticoids/adverse effects , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Venous Thromboembolism/blood , Venous Thromboembolism/chemically induced , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiologyABSTRACT
AIMS: To evaluate whether integrated care for atrial fibrillation (AF) can be safely orchestrated in primary care. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ALL-IN trial was a cluster randomized, open-label, pragmatic non-inferiority trial performed in primary care practices in the Netherlands. We randomized 26 practices: 15 to the integrated care intervention and 11 to usual care. The integrated care intervention consisted of (i) quarterly AF check-ups by trained nurses in primary care, also focusing on possibly interfering comorbidities, (ii) monitoring of anticoagulation therapy in primary care, and finally (iii) easy-access availability of consultations from cardiologists and anticoagulation clinics. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality during 2 years of follow-up. In the intervention arm, 527 out of 941 eligible AF patients aged ≥65 years provided informed consent to undergo the intervention. These 527 patients were compared with 713 AF patients in the control arm receiving usual care. Median age was 77 (interquartile range 72-83) years. The all-cause mortality rate was 3.5 per 100 patient-years in the intervention arm vs. 6.7 per 100 patient-years in the control arm [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37-0.82]. For non-cardiovascular mortality, the adjusted HR was 0.47 (95% CI 0.27-0.82). For other adverse events, no statistically significant differences were observed. CONCLUSION: In this cluster randomized trial, integrated care for elderly AF patients in primary care showed a 45% reduction in all-cause mortality when compared with usual care.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Cardiologists , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Atrial Fibrillation/therapy , Comorbidity , Humans , Netherlands/epidemiology , Primary Health CareSubject(s)
Anticoagulants , Atrial Fibrillation , Frail Elderly , Vitamin K , Humans , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Vitamin K/antagonists & inhibitors , Aged , Administration, Oral , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Drug Substitution , Aged, 80 and overABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with unprovoked (i.e., without the presence of apparent transient risk factors such as recent surgery) venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at risk of recurrence if anticoagulants are stopped after 3-6 months, yet their risk remains heterogeneous. Thus, prolonging anticoagulant treatment should be considered in high-risk patients, whereas stopping is likely preferred in those with a low predicted risk. The Vienna Prediction Model (VPM) could aid clinicians in estimating this risk, yet its clinical effects and external validity are currently unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical impact of this model on reducing recurrence risk in patients with unprovoked VTE, compared to usual care. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In a randomized controlled trial, the decision to prolong or stop anticoagulant treatment was guided by predicted recurrence risk using the VPM (n = 441), which was compared with usual care (n = 442). Patients with unprovoked VTE were recruited from local thrombosis services in the Netherlands (in Utrecht, Harderwijk, Ede, Amersfoort, Zwolle, Hilversum, Rotterdam, Deventer, and Enschede) between 22 July 2011 and 30 November 2015, with 24-month follow-up complete for all patients by early 2018. The primary outcome was recurrent VTE during 24 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding. In the total study population of 883 patients, mean age was 55 years, and 507 (57.4%) were men. A total of 96 recurrent VTE events (10.9%) were observed, 46 in the intervention arm and 50 in the control arm (risk ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.63-1.35, p = 0.67). Major bleeding occurred in 4 patients, 2 in each treatment arm, whereas CRNM bleeding occurred in 20 patients (12 in intervention arm versus 8 in control arm). The VPM showed good discriminative power (c-statistic 0.76, 95% CI 0.69-0.83) and moderate to good calibration, notably at the lower spectrum of predicted risk. For instance, in 284 patients with a predicted risk of >2% to 4%, the observed rate of recurrence was 2.5% (95% CI 0.7% to 4.3%). The main limitation of this study is that it did not enroll the preplanned number of 750 patients in each study arm due to declining recruitment rate. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that application of the VPM in all patients with unprovoked VTE is unlikely to reduce overall recurrence risk. Yet, in those with a low predicted risk of recurrence, the observed rate was also low, suggesting that it might be safe to stop anticoagulant treatment in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2680.
Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Risk Assessment/methods , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , RecurrenceABSTRACT
D-dimer testing combined with a clinical assessment has become a standard pathway for ruling-out venous thromboembolism (VTE). Recently, novel Point-of-Care (POC) D-dimer assays have been introduced, enabling low-volume blood sampling for rapid exclusion of VTE in a one-step procedure. We assessed the analytical validity and user-friendliness of a set of these novel POC D-dimer assays, and compared the results with a standard laboratory assay. Plasma samples were run on our reference assay (STA-Liatest D-di PLUS®) and five POC assays: Nano-Checker 710®, AFIAS-1®; iChroma-II®; Standard F200® and Hipro AFS/1®). After evaluating imprecision, Pearson Product-Moment correlation coefficients were calculated, Passing Bablok regression was performed and Bland-Altman plots were generated. User-friendliness was evaluated using the System Usability Scale (SUS). A set of 238 plasma samples of patients clinically suspected of VTE in general practice was available for analysis. Only one POC D-dimer assay (Nano-Checker 710) demonstrated an insufficient degree of imprecision. Pearson correlation coefficients and mean biases ranged from 0.68 to 0.93 and -165 to -53 µg/L respectively, and concordance with our reference assay varied from 71.8% to 89.5% using a 500 µg/L cut-off point. While we found considerable variation in overall user-friendliness, most devices were judged easy to use. In view of our findings regarding analytical performance and user-friendliness, we consider most of the novel POC D-dimer assays can be used in settings outside of the laboratory such as general practice, combining the possibility of multi-testing with low-volume capillary blood sampling and processing times of less than 15 min.
Subject(s)
Automation, Laboratory/standards , Biological Assay/standards , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/metabolism , Point-of-Care Testing/standards , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Benchmarking , Humans , Pulmonary Embolism/blood , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Quality Control , Time Factors , Venous Thromboembolism/blood , Venous Thrombosis/blood , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosisABSTRACT
Background: A clinical decision rule (CDR), combined with a negative D-dimer test, can safely rule out deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in primary care. This strategy is recommended by guidelines, yet uptake by GPs is low. Objective: To evaluate a multi-faceted implementation strategy aimed at increased use of the guideline recommended CDR plus D-dimer test in primary care patients with suspected DVT. Methods: This multi-faceted implementation strategy consisted of educational outreach visits, financial reimbursements and periodical newsletters. 217 Dutch GPs (implementation group) received this strategy and included patients. Effectiveness was measured through the following patient-level outcomes: (i) proportion of non-referred patients, (ii) proportion of missed DVT cases within this group and (iii) the proportion of patients in whom the guideline was applied incorrectly. Implementation outcomes ('acceptability', 'feasibility', 'fidelity' and 'sustainability') were assessed with an online questionnaire. Patient-level outcomes were compared with those of patients included by 450 GPs, uninformed about the study's purposes providing information about usual care. Results: 336 (54%) of 619 analyzable implementation group patients were not referred, missing 6 [1.8% (95% confidence interval 0.7% to 3.9%)] DVT cases. Incorrect guideline use was observed in 199 patients (32%). Self-reported acceptability, feasibility and expected sustainability were high. Guideline use increased from 42% to an expected continuation of use of 91%. Only 32 usual care GPs included 62 patients, making formal comparison unreliable. Conclusions: This multi-faceted implementation strategy safely reduced patient referral to secondary care, despite frequently incorrect application of the guideline and resulted in high acceptability, feasibility and expected sustainability.
Subject(s)
Decision Support Techniques , Health Plan Implementation/standards , Primary Health Care/standards , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosis , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products , General Practitioners/education , Guidelines as Topic/standards , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation , Netherlands , Primary Health Care/methods , Referral and Consultation , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Diagnostic prediction models such as the Wells rule can be used for safely ruling out pulmonary embolism (PE) when it is suspected. A physician's own probability estimate ("gestalt"), however, is commonly used instead. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of both approaches in primary care. METHODS: Family physicians estimated the probability of PE on a scale of 0% to 100% (gestalt) and calculated the Wells rule score in 598 patients with suspected PE who were thereafter referred to secondary care for definitive testing. We compared the discriminative ability (c statistic) of both approaches. Next, we stratified patients into PE risk categories. For gestalt, a probability of less than 20% plus a negative point-of-care d-dimer test indicated low risk; for the Wells rule, we used a score of 4 or lower plus a negative d-dimer test. We compared sensitivity, specificity, efficiency (percentage of low-risk patients in total cohort), and failure rate (percentage of patients having PE within the low-risk category). RESULTS: With 3 months of follow-up, 73 patients (12%) were confirmed to have venous thromboembolism (a surrogate for PE at baseline). The c statistic was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70-0.83) for gestalt and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.75-0.86) for the Wells rule. Gestalt missed 2 out of 152 low-risk patients (failure rate = 1.3%; 95% CI, 0.2%-4.7%) with an efficiency of 25% (95% CI, 22%-29%); the Wells rule missed 4 out of 272 low-risk patients (failure rate = 1.5%; 95% CI, 0.4%-3.7%) with an efficiency of 45% (95% CI, 41%-50%). CONCLUSIONS: Combined with d-dimer testing, both gestalt using a cutoff of less than 20% and the Wells rule using a score of 4 or lower are safe for ruling out PE in primary care. The Wells rule is more efficient, however, and PE can be ruled out in a larger proportion of suspected cases.
Subject(s)
Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Area Under Curve , Biomarkers/blood , False Negative Reactions , False Positive Reactions , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Point-of-Care Systems , Predictive Value of Tests , Primary Health Care , Probability , Prospective Studies , Pulmonary Embolism/blood , Venous Thromboembolism/bloodABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to validate the Oudega diagnostic decision rule-which was developed and validated among younger aged primary care patients-to rule-out deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in frail older outpatients. METHODS: In older patients (>60 years, either community dwelling or residing in nursing homes) with clinically suspected DVT, physicians recorded the score on the Oudega rule and d-dimer test. DVT was confirmed with a composite reference standard including ultrasonography examination and 3-month follow-up. The proportion of patients with a very low probability of DVT according to the Oudega rule (efficiency), and the proportion of patients with symptomatic venous thromboembolism during 3 months follow-up within this 'very low risk' group (failure rate) was calculated. RESULTS: DVT occurred in 164 (47%) of the 348 study participants (mean age 81 years, 85% residing in nursing homes). The probability of DVT was very low in 69 patients (Oudega score ≤3 points plus a normal d-dimer test; efficiency 20%) of whom four had non-fatal DVT (failure rate 5.8%; 2.3-14%). With a simple revised version of the Oudega rule for older suspected patients, 43 patients had a low risk of DVT (12% of the total population) of whom only one had DVT (failure rate 2.3%; 0.4-12%). CONCLUSIONS: In older suspected patients, application of the original Oudega rule to exclude DVT resulted in a higher failure rate as compared to previous studies. A revised and simplified Oudega strategy specifically developed for elderly suspected patients resulted in a lower failure rate though at the expense of a lower efficiency.