Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 31, 2026

Catheter Ablation in Combination With Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 26, 2013
Net Clinical Benefits of Guidelines and Decision Tool Recommendations for Oral Anticoagulant Use among Patients with
Anand R Shewale1, Jill T Johnson2, Chenghui Li1
1Division of Pharmaceutical Evaluation and Policy, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR.
Insights
Oral anticoagulant (OAC) use concordant with most guidelines improved net clinical benefit for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. CHEST guidelines showed the highest benefit, while CHA2DS2-VASc aids didn't consistently outperform CHADS2 aids.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Clinical Decision Making
- Pharmacotherapy
Background:
- Existing guidelines (CHEST, ESC, AHA) and decision tools (LaHaye, Casciano) provide recommendations for oral anticoagulant (OAC) use in atrial fibrillation (AF).
- The net clinical benefit (NCB) of OAC prescribing aligned with these decision aids has not been comprehensively compared.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the net clinical benefit (NCB) of oral anticoagulant (OAC) prescribing that was concordant with established clinical practice guidelines and decision tools for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).
Main Methods:
- A retrospective cohort study utilizing LifeLink claims data from 2001-2013.
- Net clinical benefit (NCB) was defined as adverse events (thromboembolic and major bleeding) prevented per 10,000 person-years.
- Cox proportional hazard models were employed to assess the adjusted relative risk of AF adverse events associated with concordant OAC use.
Main Results:
- The study included 15,129 AF patients (33,512 person-years).
- The American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) guidelines demonstrated the highest NCB (30.07), while European Society of Cardiology guidelines showed the lowest (7.38).
- Unadjusted analysis indicated decreased AF adverse event risk with concordant OAC use for CHEST, Casciano, and LaHaye tools, but these findings lacked statistical significance after multivariate adjustment.
Conclusions:
- Concordant OAC use with most decision aids, excluding the LaHaye tool, resulted in a positive net clinical benefit (NCB).
- Decision aids based on the CHA2DS2-VASc score did not consistently yield superior NCB compared to CHADS2-based aids.
- Recommending OAC for patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 1 was associated with a reduced NCB when other factors remained constant.
Background:
The 2012 American College of Chest Physicians' Evidence-Based Clinical Practice (CHEST), the 2012 European Society of Cardiology, and the 2014 American Heart Association guidelines and published decision tools by LaHaye and Casciano offer oral anticoagulant (OAC) recommendations for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of our study was to compare the net clinical benefit (NCB) of OAC prescribing that was concordant with these decision aids.
Methods:
A cohort study of the 2001-2013 LifeLink claims data was used. NCB in concordance with each decision aid was defined as adverse events (thromboembolic and major bleed events) prevented per 10,000 person-years. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the relative risk of AF adverse events associated in concordance with each decision aid adjusted for potential confounders.
Findings:
The study included 15,129 patients with AF, contributing 33,512 person-years. The NCB of the CHEST guidelines was the highest (NCB = 30.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 28.66, 31.49) and the European Society of Cardiology guidelines the lowest (NCB = 7.38; 95% CI = 5.97, 8.80). Significant unadjusted decreases in the risk of AF adverse events associated with concordant OAC use/nonuse were found for the CHEST guidelines (hazard ratio [HR] = .825; 95% CI = .695, .979), Casciano tool (HR = .838; 95% CI = .706, .995), and LaHaye tool (HR = .841; 95% CI = .709, .999); however, none were significant after multivariate adjustment.
Conclusion:
Concordant OAC use with any of the decision aids except for the aggressive LaHaye tool led to a positive NCB. The decision aids based on the CHA2DS2-VASc algorithm did not consistently improve the NCB compared to CHADS2-based aids. Recommending OAC use when CHA2DS2-VASc score = 1 resulted in a lower NCB when all other factors guiding recommendations were held constant.
Related Concept Videos
Anticoagulant Drugs: Vitamin K Antagonists and Direct Oral Anticoagulants
Warfarin, a prominent vitamin K antagonist family member, exerts its effect by inhibiting the enzyme VKORC1 (vitamin K epoxide reductase complex 1). By hindering this enzyme, warfarin...
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Anticoagulant Drugs: Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins
Atherosclerosis III: Management
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
Antiplatelet Drugs: Prostaglandin Synthesis, P2Y12 and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors
Prostaglandin synthesis inhibitors, exemplified by the widely known aspirin, wield their power by irreversibly acetylating...

