Health-related quality of life and satisfaction in atrial fibrillation patients on anticoagulant therapy: differences between vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants: results from the multicentre REGUEIFA registry

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Identifiers

Publication date

Authors

Cabanas-Grandío, Pilar
González-Melchor, Laila
Vázquez Caamaño, María
Fernández-Obanza Windcheid, Emiliano
González-Babarro, Eva
Durán-Bobín, Olga
Piñeiro-Portela, Miriam
Prada-Delgado, Óscar
Elices-Teja, Juliana
Gutiérrez-Feijoo, Mario

Advisors

Other responsabilities

Journal Title

Bibliographic citation

Cabanas-Grandío P, González-Melchor L, Caamaño MV, Windcheid EF-O, Babarro EG, Bobín OD, Portela MP, Delgado OP, Teja JE, Feijoo MG, Freire E, Díaz Castro O, Muñiz García J, García-Seara J, González-Juataney C. Health-related quality of life and satisfaction in atrial fibrillation patients on anticoagulant therapy: differences between vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants: results from the multicentre REGUEIFA registry. J Clin Med (Basel). 2024;13(17):5283.

Type of academic work

Academic degree

Abstract

[Abstract] Background: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is pivotal in the clinical management of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) prevent thromboembolic events, but information about the quality of life (QoL) and patient satisfaction in relation with the anticoagulant treatment is limited. Methods: REGUEIFA is a prospective, observational, and multicentre study that included patients with AF treated by cardiologists. We included patients treated with VKAs or DOACs. The EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire evaluated QoL, and the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) questionnaire investigated patient satisfaction with OAC. Results: A total of 904 patients were included (532 on VKA and 372 on DOACs). A total of 846 patients completed the EQ-5D questionnaire, with results significantly worse in patients on VKAs than on DOACs: more mobility limitations (37.6% vs. 24.2%, p < 0.001), more restriction in usual activities (24.7% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.026), more pain/discomfort (31.8% vs. 24.2%, p = 0.015), a lower visual analogue scale (VAS) score (66.4 ± 16.21 vs. 70.8 ± 15.6), and a lower EQ-D5 index (0.79 ± 0.21 vs. 0.85 ± 0.2, p < 0.001). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, VKA treatment was not an independent factor towards worse EQ-5D results. Also, 738 patients completed the ACTS questionnaire, and burden and profit scores were lower in patients on VKAs than for DOACs (52.1 ± 8.4 vs. 55.5 ± 6.8, p < 0.001 and 11.1 ± 2.4 vs. 11.8 ± 2.6, p < 0.001, respectively). The negative impact score was higher for VKAs than for DOACs (1.8 ± 1.02 vs. 1.6 ± 0.99, p < 0.001), with a general positive impact score lower for VKAs than for DOACs (3.6 ± 0.96 vs. 3.8 ± 1.02, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Patients on VKA have more comorbidity and worse EQ-5D and VAS scores than those on DOACs. VKA has a greater burden and higher negative impact on the patient’s life than DOACs.

Description

Rights

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0)
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0)

Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0)