Background: As direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have become widely recommended as first-line anticoagulation therapy, patients who remain on warfarin are likely those unable to afford, adhere to, or utilize DOAC therapy due to the presence of a contraindication. It is currently unknown how availability of DOACs have affected populations being managed at warfarin (VKA) anticoagulation clinics. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review assessing warfarin-treated patients at an outpatient anticoagulation clinic. The primary endpoint was the 6-month time in therapeutic range (TTR) before and after DOACs were recommended as first-line therapy by clinical guidelines. Study periods were January to June 2015, before DOACs were recommended over VKA, and January to June 2022, when DOACs were often recommended over VKA. TTR, demographic changes, and the presence of contraindications to DOAC therapy in the clinic population between the two time periods were assessed. Results: No difference in 6-month TTR was observed between study periods (59% in 2015 vs 63% in 2022; P = .45). Patient demographics did not significantly vary, which may be due to the clinic retaining 45% of patients between both time periods. Contraindications to DOAC therapy were identified in 39% of the 2015 group and 49% of the 2022 group (P = .18). The most common contraindication was indication for anticoagulation. Conclusion: Availability of DOACs did not seem to significantly affect the population or management of warfarin-treated patients at an outpatient anticoagulation clinic, however, contraindications and potential challenges to use of DOAC therapy are present in many patients.

UNASSIGNED: High-quality documentation is critical in medical settings for providing safe patient care. This study was done with the objective of assessing the standard of medical records in anticoagulation clinics and investigating the distinctions between notes written by pharmacists and physicians.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of data from electronic health records (EHRs) was performed on patients who received anticoagulation and were observed at anticoagulation clinics from October to December 2020. Patients were monitored in two anticoagulation clinics, one administered by pharmacists and the other by physicians. The quality of the documentation was assessed using a score, and the note was assigned one of five categories according to its score: very good, good, average, poor, and very poor. The data was analyzed using Stata/SE 13.1. P value<0.05 was considered significant in all analytical tests.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 331 patients were included. While 160 patients (48.3%) were followed by the physician-led clinic, 171 (51.6%) were by the pharmacist-led clinic. The average age of the patients was 54 ± 15. 60.73% of them were female, and 90.3% of them were Saudi nationals. Warfarin was the most widely used anticoagulant (70%), followed by rivaroxaban (15.7%). Compared to physicians, pharmacists demonstrated very strong documentation (54% vs. 18%). The examination of the variables considered in the study revealed that physicians had significantly less drug-drug interaction documentation (17 vs. 71 times) or drug-food interaction documentation (23 vs. 71 times) than pharmacists. In terms of follow-up frequency, pharmacists were found to adhere to the clinic protocol (150 times) more frequently than physicians (104 times). However, there was no significant difference in therapeutic plan documentation between the two groups. (p = 0.416).
UNASSIGNED: Pharmacists were more comprehensive in their documentation than physicians in anticoagulation clinics. Unified clinic documentation can ensure consistent documentation within EHRs across all disciplines.

Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome (APS) is a complex autoimmune disorder that includes a combination of laboratory criteria and clinical events (thrombosis, pregnancy complications). Accurate classification is essential, as APS patients may have limited oral anticoagulant options and requires indefinite anticoagulation. The prevalence of inaccurate APS misclassification is unknown. This study sought to determine the proportion of patients in an academic health-system who formally met APS criteria.
This retrospective cohort study included any patient within the University of Utah Health system who had an International Classification of Diseases-10 code for APS, between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2020. Manual chart review was performed to assess the appropriateness of the APS classification by laboratory and clinical criteria.
Of the 184 patients identified, 59 (32.1 %) formally met APS criteria, while 69 (37.5 %) did not meet criteria. The remaining 56 (30.4 %) patients lacked enough information in their medical records to decide on appropriateness of APS classification. The most prevalent reason for inappropriate APS classification in the 69 patients identified was incorrect interpretation of lab values as positive (62; 89.9 %), followed by lack of repeat confirmation testing (32; 46.4 %).
The results of this single-center study indicate that only one-third of patients with presumed APS met classification criteria. This was predominantly due to incorrect collection or interpretation of APS laboratory data. One-third had insufficient medical record data to determine APS classification, which impairs clinical decision-making. This suggests more education or implementation of anticoagulation stewardship is needed to ensure accurate APS classification and proper management of anticoagulation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Electronic medical record-based interventions such as best practice alerts, or reminders, have been proposed to improve evidence-based medication prescribing. Formal implementation evaluation including long-term sustainment are not commonly reported. Preprocedural medication management is often a complex issue for patients taking antithrombotic medications.
METHODS: We implemented a best practice alert (BPA) that recommended referral to an anticoagulation clinic before outpatient elective gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopies. Eligible patients were taking an oral anticoagulant (warfarin or direct oral anticoagulant [DOAC]) and/or antiplatelet medications. Patients referred to the anticoagulation clinic were compared to those managed by the ordering provider. Outcomes assessed included guideline-adherent drug management before endoscopy, documentation of a medication management plan, guideline-adherent rates of bridging for high-risk patients taking warfarin, and evaluation for sustained use of BPA.
RESULTS: Eighty percent of patients (553/691) were referred to the anticoagulation clinic during the initial 13-month study period. Most referrals came from gastroenterologists (397/553; 71.8%) followed by primary care providers (127/554; 22.9%). Patients referred had improved rates of guideline-adherent medication management compared to those who were not referred (97.4% vs 91.0%; P = .001). Documentation of medication plan was significantly higher in the referred group (99.1% vs 59.4%; P ≤ .001). There were no differences in rates of appropriate bridging for patients taking warfarin. Implementation of the BPA also resulted in sustained, consistent use over an additional 18 months following the initial study period.
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a BPA before elective outpatient GI endoscopies was associated with improved rates of guideline-adherent medication management and documented management plan, while streamlining preprocedural medication management.

Background: COVID-19 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-II) has become a global pandemic disrupting public health services. Telemedicine has emerged as an important tool to deliver care during these situations. Patients receiving Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) require structured monitoring which has posed a challenge during this pandemic. We aimed to evaluate the impact of Virtual anticoagulation clinic (VAC), a Telehealth model on the quality of anticoagulation, adverse events, and patient satisfaction vis-a-vis standard Anticoagulation clinic (ACC) care. Materials and methods: A bidirectional cohort study was conducted in the Department of Cardiology, JSS Hospital, Mysore. Two hundred and twenty-eight patients in the VAC and 274 patients in the ACC fulfilling inclusion criteria were the subjects of the study. Telehealth tools like WhatsApp and telephone were used. Time in therapeutic range (TTR), Percentage of International normalized ratio in range (PINRR), and adverse events were analyzed and compared between the VAC group and the ACC group, between pre-COVID and COVID ACC groups, and between the VAC group and the same pre-COVID cohort. Patient satisfaction was assessed by a questionnaire at the end of 8 months. Descriptive statistics were used for the patient characteristics and inferential statistics for the comparisons between pre-VAC and VAC care. Results: The mean TTR was 75.4 ± 8.9% and 71.2 ± 13.4% in the VAC group and ACC group, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean PINRR was 66.7 ± 9.4% and 62.4 ± 10.9% in the VAC group and ACC group respectively, (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in TTR between the VAC group and the same pre-COVID cohort. The TTR differential between the pre-COVID and COVID ACC groups was significant. In either group, no major adverse events were seen. The most common tools used for data exchange were WhatsApp (83%) and SMS (17%). Seventy-four percent of patients were extremely satisfied with the overall VAC care. Conclusions: Virtual anticoagulation clinic, a telehealth model can be used as an alternative option to deliver uninterrupted anticoagulation care during pandemic times.

To assess budget impact of the implementation of an anticoagulation clinic (AC) compared to usual care (UC), in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).
A decision tree was designed to analyze the cost and events rates over a 1-year horizon. The patients were distributed according to treatment, 30% Direct Oral Anticoagulant (DOAC) regimens and the rest to warfarin. The thromboembolism and bleeding were derived from observational studies which demonstrated that ACs had important impact in reducing the frequency of these events compared with UC, due to higher adherence with DOACs and proportion of time in therapeutic range (TTR) with warfarin. Costs were derived from the transactional platform of Colombian government, healthcare authority reimbursement and published studies. The values were expressed in American dollars (USD). The exchanged rate used was COP $3.693 per dollar.
During 1 year of follow-up, in a cohort of 228 patients there were estimated 48 bleedings, 6 thromboembolisms in AC group versus 84 bleedings, and 12 thromboembolisms events in patients receiving UC. Total costs related to AC were $126 522 compared with $141 514 in UC. The AC had an important reduction in the cost of clinical events versus UC ($52 085 vs $110 749) despite a higher cost of care facilities ($74 436 vs $30 765). A sensibility analysis suggested that in the 83% of estimations, the AC produced savings varied between $27 078 and $135 391.
This study demonstrated that AC compared with UC, produced an important savings in the oral anticoagulation therapy for patients with NVAF.

As a result of infection control regulations during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, anticoagulation clinics have been required to adjust their practices in order to continue providing safe and effective services for their patients. In accordance with a guidance document issued by the Anticoagulation Forum, The Brooklyn Hospital Center (TBHC) anticoagulation clinic in Brooklyn, New York implemented measures including telemedicine follow-ups instead of in-person clinic visits, extending the interval of INR testing, and reviewing eligible candidates for transition from warfarin to direct oral anticoagulants. This study describes the outcomes of one hospital-based clinic location in the 3 months before and after COVID-19 became a significant concern in the New York City area. The primary outcome of time-in-therapeutic range (TTR) for patients receiving warfarin was 60.6 % and 65.8 % in the pre-COVID and post-COVID groups, respectively (p = 0.21). For secondary outcomes, there was no difference in percent of therapeutic INRs (51.5 % pre-COVID v. 44.8 % post-COVID, p = 0.75) or percent of INRs ≥ 4.5 (2.3 % pre-COVID v. 4 % post-COVID, p = 0.27). Based on the data reported in this study, the short-term changes implemented at TBHC\'s anticoagulation clinic did not appear to cause reductions in safety and efficacy of chronic warfarin therapy management.

Treating an anticoagulated patient with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) remains a challenge, especially in areas where dicoumarins are still the first drug of choice due to the cost of other oral anticoagulants. Anticoagulation clinics have proven to be the most efficient and safe way to avoid thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications and to keep patients in optimal treatment range. However, they require adequate infrastructure and trained personnel to work properly. In this Argentine consensus we propose a series of guidelines for the effective management of the anticoagulation clinics. The goal is to achieve the excellence in both the clinical healthcare and the hemostasis laboratory for the anticoagulated patient. The criteria developed in the document were agreed upon by a large group of expert specialists in hematology and biochemistry from all over the country. The criteria presented here must always be considered when indicating VKA although they had to be adapted to the unequal reality of each center. Taking these premises into consideration will allow us to optimize the management of the anticoagulated patient with VKA and thus minimize thrombotic and hemorrhagic intercurrences, in order to honor our promise not to harm the patient.
El tratamiento de un paciente anticoagulado con antagonistas de la vitamina K (AVK) sigue siendo un desafío, especialmente en regiones donde, por el costo, los dicumarínicos son todavía la alternativa más buscada a la hora de elegir un anticoagulante oral. Las clínicas de anticoagulación han demostrado ser la forma más eficiente y segura de evitar complicaciones trombóticas y hemorrágicas y de mantener al paciente en rango óptimo de tratamiento. Sin embargo, requieren de una adecuada infraestructura y personal capacitado para que funcionen eficientemente. En este consenso argentino se propone una serie de parámetros para la gestión efectiva de una clínica de anticoagulación. El objetivo es lograr una elevada calidad desde el punto de vista clínico-asistencial a través de un laboratorio de hemostasia de excelencia. Los criterios desarrollados en el documento fueron consensuados por un amplio grupo de expertos especialistas en hematología y en bioquímica de todo el país. Estos criterios deben adaptarse a la irregular disponibilidad de recursos de cada centro, pero siempre se los debe tener en cuenta a la hora de indicar el tratamiento anticoagulante con estas drogas. Tener en consideración estas premisas nos permitirá optimizar la atención del enfermo anticoagulado con AVK y de esta forma minimizar las intercurrencias trombóticas y hemorrágicas a las que está expuesto, para así honrar nuestra promesa de no dañar al paciente.

Despite long-standing experience with warfarin, anticoagulation clinic services are often confronted with the challenging clinical situation of patients with overanticoagulation. This requires repeat international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring and in some cases administration of vitamin K to minimize the risk of bleeding. A study was performed to determine the safety and efficacy of outpatient management in order to provide guidance on the management of patients with prolonged INRs. Patients on stable warfarin therapy for more than 1 month attending a dedicated academic hospital anticoagulation clinic who had an INR ≥5 were identified over a 1-year period. Follow-up INR results and outcomes were recorded for 30 days. One hundred and ninety-five episodes of overanticoagulation in 148 patients were identified. Patients were classified as low risk (n = 85, 57.4%) and moderate risk of bleeding (n = 63, 42.6%). The mean index INR was 7.22 (1.88). Management with low-dose oral vitamin K (n = 32, 16.4%) did not significantly result in a more rapid correction of the INR when compared to conservative management (n = 163, 83.6%; P = .103). Follow-up INR testing was performed at a mean of 11.1 (8.9) days from the index measurement. A mean of 1.6 (0.9) follow-up INR tests were performed per episode. During the 30-day follow-up, there was 1 (0.5%) episode of major bleeding and 1 (0.5%) death. The management of asymptomatic outpatients with overanticoagulation is associated with a low risk of major bleeding within 30 days. Conservative management of overanticoagulation is as effective as utilizing low-dose oral vitamin K.

To assess the clinical profile and thromboembolic and bleeding events in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who were attended in a hematology unit.
Retrospective study of AF patients that started treatment with rivaroxaban between February 2012 and June 2016 in a hematology unit from a tertiary hospital in Spain.
Overall, 243 patients (mean age 78.4 ± 10.1 years; 47.5% women, CHA2DS2-VASc 3.7 ± 1.5) were included. After a mean follow-up of 16.5 ± 12.7 months, rivaroxaban was discontinued in only 2.4% of patients. During the follow-up, seven (2.0 events/100 patient-years) patients had a thromboembolic event and six patients (1.7 events/100 patient-years) a major bleeding.
Rivaroxaban was effective and safe among AF patients treated in a hematology unit, with very low discontinuation rates.