Impact of Clinical Decision Support Within the Electronic Medical Record on Opioid Prescribing and Dispensing.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical decision support tools support prescribers and pharmacists as they select and verify appropriate opioid regimens in efforts to combat the high variability in opioid prescribing. This study seeks to examine the impact of alerts within the electronic medical record and pharmacy system on day supply of initial opioid prescribing and dispensing. METHODS: This retrospective study compared a 6-month pre- and postimplementation of clinical decision support tool alerts at an integrated health care system. Data were analyzed to assess changes in the day supply of an opioid at the point of initial prescribing and dispensing based on alerts. RESULTS: The best practice alert in the electronic medical record was associated with a 27% change (p = 0.007) in prescribing by the physician, which resulted in a reduction of average day supply from 12.09 to 6.58 days. The alert in the pharmacy system was associated with a 41.3% change (p < 0.001) in dispensing, which resulted in a reduction of average day supply from 13.46 to 6.96 days. DISCUSSION: To promote judicious opioid prescribing, the best practice alert in the electronic medical record led to a statistically significant change in prescribing. To support appropriate dispensing, the alert in the pharmacy system led to a statistically significant change in dispensing. CONCLUSION: Implementation of two clinical decision support tools that mirrored Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations of prescribing less than a 7-day supply when initiating opioids resulted in a decrease in day supply of the opioid prescription for patients identified as opioid-naïve at the point of prescribing and dispensing.

Effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with venous thromboembolism and creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min.

The few studies that compared direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) vs. warfarin in the setting of advanced renal insufficiency have focused on patients with atrial fibrillation. The purpose of this observational, matched, cohort study of patients was to assess the effectiveness and safety of DOAC vs. warfarin for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among patients with a creatinine clearance (CrCl) < 30 mL/min. This observational, cohort study included patients with VTE and CrCl < 30 mL/min who were newly initiated on a DOAC or warfarin between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020. DOAC patients were matched up to 1:2 to warfarin patients. Primary outcome was a composite of recurrent VTE, clinically-relevant bleeding, ischemic stroke, and all-cause mortality. Adjusted conditional, multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to assess outcomes. 626 DOAC patients were matched to 1071 warfarin patients. DOAC patients had a higher mean age, higher mean baseline CrCl, and were less likely to have been receiving dialysis. There was no statistically significant difference in the composite outcome between groups (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.47) or in the individual components of the composite (all HR 95% CI crossed 1.00). Identification of statistically non-significant rates of bleeding and thromboembolic outcomes suggest that the use of DOAC or warfarin is reasonable in patients with VTE and CrCl < 30 mL/min.

Clinical outcomes of dabigatran use in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and weight >120 kg.

BACKGROUND: Patients with obesity were underrepresented in studies evaluating the safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This study compared clinical outcomes in patients with NVAF and weighing >120 kg and ≤120 kg who were receiving dabigatran. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective, matched, longitudinal cohort study included patients from three integrated healthcare delivery systems. Patients ≥18 years of age with NVAF were included if between September 1, 2016 and June 30, 2019 they received dabigatran. Patients >120 kg and ≤120 kg were matched up to 1:6 on age, sex, and CHA2DS2-VASc score. Data were extracted from administrative databases. The primary outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, clinically-relevant bleeding, systemic embolism, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: 777 and 3522 patients >120 kg and ≤120 kg, respectively, were matched. The >120 kg group tended to be younger with a higher burden of chronic disease. There was no difference between groups in the composite outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.89-1.37) or individual components of the composite. A subanalysis of clinically-relevant bleeding identified that patients >120 kg were at a greater risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (AHR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01-2.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NVAF and >120 kg, dabigatran use was associated with a small increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding but no differences in stroke, mortality or clinically-relevant bleeding. These findings suggest that dabigatran use is reasonable in patients with NVAF and weight >120 kg.