Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 721–729 | Cite as

Impact of warfarin discharge education program on hospital readmission and treatment costs

  • Luigi Brunetti
  • Seung-Mi Lee
  • Nancy Doherty
  • David Suh
  • Jeong-Eun Kim
  • Sun-Hong Lee
  • Yong Chan Choi
  • Dong-Churl Suh
Research Article
  • 214 Downloads

Abstract

Background Although warfarin is highly effective, management of patients prescribed warfarin is complex due to its narrow therapeutic window. Objective To evaluate the impact of a formal warfarin discharge education program (WDEP) on hospital readmission and treatment costs in patients who received warfarin therapy. Setting Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital Somerset in Somerville, New Jersey, USA. Method In this interventional cohort study, patients were assigned to either the WDEP group or the usual care group. The effects of the WDEP on readmission within 90 days after discharge were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. Factors influencing treatment cost were identified using generalized linear model with log-link function and gamma distribution. Main outcome measure Hospital readmission within 90 days and treatment costs associated with hospital readmission. Results Among 692 eligible patients, 203 in each group were matched using propensity scores and there were no statistically significant differences in the patient baseline characteristics between two groups. The risk of all-cause readmission within 90 days was significantly lower in the WDEP group compared to the usual care group (relative risk = 0.46, 95% CI 0.28–0.76). The treatment costs associated with hospital readmission in the WDEP group were 19% lower than those in the usual care group after adjusting for the study variables. Conclusion A formal, individualized WDEP provided by pharmacists resulted in significant reduction of readmission and treatment costs. The economic burden of treatment costs associated with warfarin can be controlled if well-organized warfarin education is provided to patients who received warfarin therapy.

Keywords

Hospital discharge Hospital readmission Patient education Pharmaceutical care Treatment costs USA Warfarin education 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Ms. Seyunghe Je and Mr. Sung-su Lee for their assiatance with searching articles and initial data entry.

Funding

This research was supported by Chung-Ang University Research Scholarship grants (Seoul, South Korea) awarded in 2016.

Conflicts of interest

All the authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11096_2018_631_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (237 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 237 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Kimmel SE. Warfarin therapy: in need of improvement after all these years. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2008;9(5):677–86.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schwarz UI, Ritchie MD, Bradford Y, Li C, Dudek SM, Frye-Anderson A, et al. Genetic determinants of response to warfarin during initial anticoagulation. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(10):999–1008.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wysowski DK, Nourjah P, Swartz L. Bleeding complications with warfarin use—a prevalent adverse effect resulting in regulatory action. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(13):1414–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Joint Commission. National Patient Safety Goals: Hospital Accreditation Program. 2017. http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/NPSG_Chapter_HAP_Jan2017.pdf. Accessed 20 Dec 2017.
  5. 5.
    Daniel SB, Lovegrove MC, Shehab N, Richards CL. Emergency hospitalizations for adverse drug events in older Americans. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(21):2002–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kimmel SE, Chen Z, Price M, Parker CS, Metlay JP, Christie JD, et al. The influence of patient adherence on anticoagulation control with warfarin—results from the International Normalized Ratio Adherence and Genetics (IN-RANGE) Study. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(3):229–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van Walraven C, Jennings A, Oake N, Fergusson D, Forster AJ. Effect of study setting on anticoagulation control—a systematic review and metaregression. Chest. 2006;129(5):1155–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oden A, Fahlen M. Oral anticoagulation and risk of death: a medical record linkage study. Br Med J. 2002;325(7372):1073–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kagansky N, Knobler H, Rimon E, Ozer Z, Levy S. Safety of anticoagulation therapy in well-informed older patients. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(18):2044–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beyth RJ, Landefeld CS. Learning the respective roles of warfarin and dabigatran to prevent stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(10):714–5 W218.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hu A, Chow CM, Dao D, Errett L, Keith M. Factors influencing patient knowledge of warfarin therapy after mechanical heart valve replacement. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2006;21(3):169–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosner B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics. 8th ed. Brooks: Cole Cengage Learning; 2015.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dager WE, Branch JM, King JH, White RH, Quan RS, Musallam NA, et al. Optimization of inpatient warfarin therapy: impact of daily consultation by a pharmacist-managed anticoagulation service. Ann Pharmacother. 2000;34:567–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DD. Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Stat Assoc. 1984;79:516–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    D’agostino RB. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17:2265–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sturmer T, Joshi M, Glynn RJ, Avorn J, Rothman KJ, Schneeweiss S. A review of the application of propensity score methods yielded increasing use, advantages in specific settings, but not substantially different estimates compared with conventional multivariable methods. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:437–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gu XS, Rosenbaum PR. Comparison of multivariate matching methods: structures, distances, and algorithms. J Comput Graph Stat. 1993;2(4):405–20.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Wiley; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An introduction to the bootstrap. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Akaike H. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Caski F, editors. Proceedings of the second international symposium on information theory. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado; 1973:267–81.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Anderson DR, Burnham KP. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. New York: Springer; 2011.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    White RH, Beyth RJ, Zhou H, Romano PS. Major bleeding after hospitalization for deep-venous thrombosis. Am J Med. 1999;107(5):414–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wofford JL, Wells MD, Singh S. Best strategies for patient education about anticoagulation with warfarin: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:40.  https://doi.org/10.1186/472-6963-8-40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wilhelm SM, Petrovitch EA. Implementation of an inpatient anticoagulation teaching service: expanding the role of pharmacy students and residents in patient education. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2011;68(21):2086–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45(6):613–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Spyropoulos AC, Lin J. Direct medical costs of venous thromboembolism and subsequent hospital readmission rates: an administrative claims analysis from 30 managed care organizations. J Manag Care Pharm. 2007;13(6):475–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nasir K, Lin ZQ, Bueno H, Normand SLT, Drye EE, Keenan PS, et al. Is same-hospital readmission rate a good surrogate for all-hospital readmission rate? Med Care. 2010;48(5):477–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ernest Mario School of PharmacyRutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA
  2. 2.RWJ Barnabas HealthRobert Wood Johnson University Hospital SomersetSomervilleUSA
  3. 3.College of PharmacyChung-Ang UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.School of Public HealthColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations