ABSTRACT
Anticoagulation therapy is standard for conditions like atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, and valvular heart disease, yet it is unclear if there are ethnoracial disparities in its quality and delivery in the United States. For this scoping review, electronic databases were searched for publications between January 1, 2011 - March 30, 2022. Eligible studies included all study designs, any setting within the United States, patients prescribed anticoagulation for any indication, outcomes reported for ≥ 2 distinct ethnoracial groups. The following four research questions were explored: Do ethnoracial differences exist in 1) access to guideline-based anticoagulation therapy, 2) quality of anticoagulation therapy management, 3) clinical outcomes related to anticoagulation care, 4) humanistic/educational outcomes related to anticoagulation therapy. A total of 5374 studies were screened, 570 studies received full-text review, and 96 studies were analyzed. The largest mapped focus was patients' access to guideline-based anticoagulation therapy (88/96 articles, 91.7%). Seventy-eight articles made statistical outcomes comparisons among ethnoracial groups. Across all four research questions, 79 articles demonstrated favorable outcomes for White patients compared to non-White patients, 38 articles showed no difference between White and non-White groups, and 8 favored non-White groups (the total exceeds the 78 articles with statistical outcomes as many articles reported multiple outcomes). Disparities disadvantaging non-White patients were most pronounced in access to guideline-based anticoagulation therapy (43/66 articles analyzed) and quality of anticoagulation management (19/21 articles analyzed). Although treatment guidelines do not differentiate anticoagulant therapy by ethnoracial group, this scoping review found consistently favorable outcomes for White patients over non-White patients in the domains of access to anticoagulation therapy for guideline-based indications and quality of anticoagulation therapy management. No differences among groups were noted in clinical outcomes, and very few studies assessed humanistic or educational outcomes.
ABSTRACT
Background: Off-label dosing of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is both common and associated with adverse patient outcomes. Evidence describing best practices to support optimal direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing is limited. Objective: To describe the impact of clinical pharmacist intervention on DOAC prescribing. Methods: This retrospective study was a descriptive analysis conducted within an integrated healthcare system with a centralized, pharmacist-led Anticoagulation Management Service (AMS). Patients prescribed a DOAC between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 were included. Pharmacy dispensing reports were generated for pharmacist review and anticoagulant drug therapy changes were recommended to physicians where appropriate. The primary objective was to describe the number and type of recommendations made. Secondary objectives were to determine the provider acceptance rate based on the intervention type and on clinical vs formulary recommendations. Results: Clinical pharmacists made 147 recommendations for 2331 unique patients included in the analysis. Twenty-three recommendations (16%) were to decrease the dose, 46 (31%) were to increase the dose, 14 (10%) were to change the medication due to clinical scenario, 62 (42%) were to change the medication due to cost, and 2 (1%) were another issue. One hundred twenty-three (84%) recommendations were accepted. The provider acceptance rate was similar for clinical and formulary recommendations (85% and 82% respectively). Conclusion: Implementation of report-driven clinical pharmacist intervention led to an improvement in appropriate DOAC medication selection and dosing.
