Healthcare Resource Utilization for Oral Anticoagulant Reversal Therapies in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation/Venous Thromboembolism Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to describe the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs with hospitalized patients receiving specific versus non-specific oral anticoagulation reversal therapy for life-threatening bleeds and emergency surgeries or urgent procedures. METHODS: This retrospective observational study using the Premier Healthcare Database included adult patients aged ≥ 18 years treated with idarucizumab (IDA) or 3- or 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) to reverse the effects of dabigatran or warfarin, respectively, between October 2015 and February 2018. RESULTS: -VASc; P = 0.014) and lower prevalence of comorbidities compared with PCC patients. Median hospital length of stay was 6 and 7 days for patients who received IDA or PCC (P < 0.001), respectively. The percentage of patients with an intensive care unit (ICU) admission was lower for IDA patients compared with PCC patients (61.3% vs. 68.7%; P < 0.001). Median total costs per hospitalization were $19,357 for IDA patients and $26,920 for PCC patients (P < 0.001). Median costs per hospitalization for IDA and PCC treatment were $3,277 and $4,424, respectively. When HCRU and costs were examined by cause of reversal and type of bleed, similar trends in hospitalized costs emerged for IDA compared with PCC treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis revealed lower HCRU and total hospital costs in patients administered IDA compared with PCC for reversal of oral anticoagulation, though differences in population characteristics and bleeding events were observed that may have contributed to these findings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".