Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2005 Dec 8:3:20.
doi: 10.1186/1477-9560-3-20.

Anticoagulant treatment at a specialized outpatient anticoagulant therapy unit, a descriptive study

Affiliations

Anticoagulant treatment at a specialized outpatient anticoagulant therapy unit, a descriptive study

Kim Ekblom et al. Thromb J. .

Abstract

Background: The indications for continuous oral anticoagulant treatment, the target interval and the procedures for withdrawing treatment have changed in the last 10 years.

Methods: Patients on continuous oral anticoagulant treatment at the Outpatient Anticoagulant Clinic at Umeå University Hospital in 2002 were included in a descriptive study (n = 900). 263 of those had a mechanical heart valve prosthesis. Only patient records for patients with other indications than mechanical heart valve prosthesis were examined. 582 of those records were found. In the 55 remaining patients some clinical information was retrieved from the computerised warfarin dosage database. These latter, more unsure clinical data, are presented separately. Anticoagulant treatment was discontinued if lack of proper indication or presence of too high risk for hemorrhagic complications were found.

Results: The prevalence of continuous oral anticoagulant treatment in the uptake area was 0.65%. The most common target interval was INR 2.1-3.0, but patients with a mechanical heart valve prosthesis were often treated more aggressively, i.e. with a higher INR target interval. Of the patients on continuous treatment, 26.6% of the INR values were outside 2.0-3.0. The most common reasons for oral anticoagulant treatment were atrial fibrillation or mechanical heart valve prosthesis, in contrast to earlier findings in studies of our population in 1987 and 1990. We found 90 patients (10.0%) without proper indication for oral anticoagulant treatment or too high risk, and their treatment was discontinued.

Conclusion: In patients on oral anticoagulant therapy, re-evaluation of indications and risks resulted in a substantial number of treatment withdrawals. There have been major changes in treatment indications during the last decade, possibly due to rapid development of knowledge in the field of thrombosis risk factors. Treatment should be re-considered once a year.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Johnsson H. [Anticoagulant therapy can be safer. An active follow-up and written care programs reduce the number of complications] Lakartidningen. 1999;96:3388–3390. - PubMed
    1. Holm T, Lassen JF. [How many patients are on oral anticoagulant therapy in Denmark? Methods to estimate the number] Ugeskr Laeger. 2003;165:1871–1875. - PubMed
    1. Stigendal L, Johnsson H. Information från Läkemedelsverket. Vol. 9. Medical Products Agency; 1998. Apekumarol ersätts nu med waran, exempel på patientinformation.
    1. Taghavi A, Jonson T, Stockelberg D. [Survey of complications following treatment with anticoagulants. A computerized search for hemorrhagic complications completes manual reporting] Lakartidningen. 1999;96:3421–3424. - PubMed
    1. Jansson JH, Westman G, Boman K, Nilsson T, Norberg B. Oral anticoagulant treatment in a medical care district--a descriptive study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 1995;13:268–274. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources