Deitelzweig, Steven B.; Jing, Yonghua; Swindle, Jason P.; Makenbaeva, Dinara
Purpose: The Clinical Decision Aid was created to assist in selecting anticoagulant therapies for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. The aid incorporates a patient's absolute risk for stroke and bleeding, relative stroke risk reduction, and increase in relative bleeding risk to identify the agent with the lowest net risk. We describe theoretical implications of utilizing the aid at a US managed care population level.; Methods: This retrospective study used claims data from a large US managed care database including enrollees in commercial and Medicare Advantage plans. The distribution of patients across each possible combination of scores on the HAS-BLED scale (evidence of hypertension, abnormal renal or liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile INR, age >65 years, and drugs or alcohol abuse or dependence) and the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc scale (CHADS(2) [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age >= 75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism] with additional nonmajor stroke risk factors, including age 65-74 years, female sex, and vascular disease) was generated. We assessed the correlation between the HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2VASc scores and derived the optimal treatment options based on various bleeding ratios.; Findings: Data from 48,260 patients were included in the analysis. The MAPD subset had a higher mean HAS-BLED score (2.17 vs 1.39; P < 0.001) and a higher mean CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score (3.35 vs 2.05; P < 0.001) than did the commercial subset. Pearson coefficients suggested a moderate to strong positive correlation between the HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2-VASc scores among the commercial (0.730; P < 0.001) and MAPD (0.568; P < 0.001) enrollees. Based on a 2:1 bleeding-to-stroke risk ratio, 70.50% of patients would be recommended treatment with apixaban; 25.86%, no treatment; 3.62%, acetylsalicylic acid; and 0.01%, dabigatran 150 mg, if the Clinical Decision Aid were to be used for anticoagulant treatment selection.; Implications: Evidence-based clinical decision making tools utilizing risk assessment for recommending a treatment may be valuable for not only health care providers but also health care payers in optimizing care at the population level. (C) 2014 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.