+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Comparison of stroke- and bleed-related healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation and newly treated with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin



Comparison of stroke- and bleed-related healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation and newly treated with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin



Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 19(2): 203-212



This is one of the first head-to-head real-world evidence studies comparing stroke-related and bleed-related healthcare and resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients initiating oral anticoagulants. Adult NVAF patients newly diagnosed and treated with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin between 10/01/2010 and 12/31/2014 were identified using MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases. Per-patient-per-month stroke and bleed-related HCRU and costs were reported. Dabigatran patients were matched 1:1 to 26,592 rivaroxaban and 33,024 warfarin patients (mean age=68 years). Compared to rivaroxaban, dabigatran patients had lower bleed-related inpatient and outpatient HCRU (0.004 vs. 0.005; 0.099 vs. 0.145) and significantly lower adjusted bleed-related costs ($116 vs. $172), all p <0.05. Compared to warfarin, dabigatran patients had significantly lower stroke-related outpatient visits (0.034 vs. 0.048, p<0.001) and higher bleed-related outpatient visits (0.101 vs. 0.091, p=0.045). Multivariate adjusted bleed-related costs were significantly lower for dabigatran patients than warfarin patients ($94 vs. $138, p<0.001). The results suggest that dabigatran patients had lower bleed-related HCRU and costs than rivaroxaban patients, and lower outpatient stroke-related HCRU, higher bleed-related outpatient HCRU, and lower bleed-related costs than warfarin patients. It provides valuable stroke-related and bleed-related HCRU and costs information among commercially insured and Medicare patients.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 065735687

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 30251553

DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2019.1527220


Related references

Comparison of all-cause, stroke, and bleed-specific healthcare resource utilization among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and newly treated with dabigatran or warfarin. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 19(2): 213-222, 2019

All-Cause, Stroke-, and Bleed-Specific Healthcare Costs: Comparison among Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation (NVAF) Newly Treated with Dabigatran or Warfarin. American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs 17(6): 481-492, 2017

Healthcare utilization and costs associated with dabigatran compared to warfarin treatment in newly diagnosed patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Current Medical Research and Opinion 31(12): 2189-2195, 2015

Health Care Resource Utilization, Costs, and Persistence in Patients Newly Diagnosed as Having Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Newly Treated With Dabigatran versus Warfarin in the United States. Clinical Therapeutics 38(3): 545-56.E1-6, 2016

Comparison of all-cause costs and healthcare resource use among patients with newly-diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation newly treated with oral anticoagulants. Current Medical Research and Opinion 34(2): 285-295, 2018

Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs Among Newly Diagnosed and Oral Anticoagulant-Naive Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients Treated with Dabigatran or Warfarin in the United States. Journal of Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy 24(1): 73-82, 2018

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban, Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Warfarin in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation. American Journal of Cardiology 120(10): 1813-1819, 2017

Hospital Admissions, Costs, and 30-Day Readmissions Among Newly Diagnosed Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients Treated with Dabigatran Etexilate or Warfarin. Journal of Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy 21(11): 1039-1053, 2015

Discontinuation risk comparison among 'real-world' newly anticoagulated atrial fibrillation patients: Apixaban, warfarin, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban. Plos one 13(4): E0195950, 2018

Comparison of Short-Term Bleeding-Related Health Care Utilization and Costs Among Treatment-Nave Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients Initiating Apixaban, Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, or Warfarin. Chest Journal 148(4): 65a-65b, 2015

Higher persistence in newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients treated with dabigatran versus warfarin. Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes 6(5): 567-574, 2013

Adherence to Rivaroxaban, Dabigatran, and Apixaban for Stroke Prevention for Newly Diagnosed and Treatment-Naive Atrial Fibrillation Patients: An Update Using 2013-2014 Data. Journal of Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy 23(9): 958-967, 2018

Risk of stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding and associated costs in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients who initiated apixaban, dabigatran or rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in the United States Medicare population. Current Medical Research and Opinion 33(9): 1595-1604, 2017

Is There a Preferred Stroke Prevention Strategy for Diabetic Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation? Comparing Warfarin, Dabigatran and Rivaroxaban. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 118(01): 072-081, 2018

Is There a Preferred Stroke Prevention Strategy for Diabetic Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation? Comparing Warfarin, Dabigatran and Rivaroxaban. Thrombosis and Haemostasis 118(1): 72-81, 2018