Real-World Direct Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban, Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Warfarin in Medicare Beneficiaries With Atrial Fibrillation.

It remains unknown whether the comparative effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin differs between atrial fibrillation patients with and without a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Using 2012 to 2014 Medicare claims data, we identified patients newly diagnosed with AF in 2013 to 2014 who initiated apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin. We categorized patients based on a history of stroke or TIA. We constructed Cox proportional hazard models that included indicator variables for treatment groups, a history of stroke or TIA, and the interaction between them, and controlled for demographics and clinical characteristics. DOACs were generally more effective than warfarin in stroke prevention; however, there were important differences between subgroups defined by a history of ischemic stroke. In particular, the superiority of dabigatran compared with warfarin in ischemic stroke prevention was more pronounced in patients with a history of stroke or TIA (hazard ratio [HR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48 to 0.85) than in patients with no history of stroke or TIA (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.16; p value for interaction = 0.034). There was no difference in the risk of stroke between apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban in patients with no history of stroke or TIA. However, in patients with a history of stroke or TIA, the risk of stroke was lower with dabigatran (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.85) and rivaroxaban (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87), compared with apixaban (p value for both interactions <0.05). In conclusion, the comparative effectiveness of DOACs differs substantially between patients with and without a history of stroke or TIA; specifically, apixaban is less effective in patients with a history of stroke or TIA.

Effect of Sahaja yoga meditation on quality of life, anxiety, and blood pressure control.

OBJECTIVE: The present study investigates the effect of Sahaja yoga meditation on quality of life, anxiety, and blood pressure control. DESIGN: The prospective observational cohort study enrolled two study groups: those receiving treatment from the International Sahaja Yoga Research and Health Center (meditation group) and those receiving treatment from the Mahatma Gandhi Mission Hospital (control group). Researchers measured quality of life, anxiety, and blood pressure before and after treatment. RESULTS: Sixty-seven (67) participants in the meditation group and 62 participants in the control group completed the study. The two groups were comparable in demographic and clinical characteristics. At baseline, the meditation group had higher quality of life (p<0.001) than controls but similar anxiety level (p=0.74) to controls. Within-group pre- versus post-treatment comparisons showed significant improvement in quality of life, anxiety, and blood pressure in the meditation group (p<0.001), while in controls, quality of life deteriorated and there was no improvement in blood pressure. The improvement in quality of life, anxiety reduction, and blood pressure control was greater in the meditation group. The beneficial effect of meditation remained significant after adjusting for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Meditation treatment was associated with significant improvements in quality of life, anxiety reduction, and blood pressure control.