Is rivaroxaban a cost‐effective anticoagulation therapy compared with warfarin?. Issue 10 (October 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hawks, Matthew; Moss, David
• Is Part Of: Evidence-based practice. Volume 20:Issue 10(2017)
• Publication Date: 2017-10
• DOI: 10.1097/01.EBP.0000541851.44113.f8
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1095-4120

Abstract

Abstract : Bottom line : Yes. For the treatment of atrial fibrillation, patients given rivaroxaban have similar or lower total costs than patients given warfarin (including medications, laboratory costs, hospitalizations, outpatient/emergency visits, and transportation) over the short term (SOR: B, consistent cohort studies). Rivaroxaban is also likely cost effective after 16 years compared with warfarin for treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) (SOR: B, cost‐effectiveness simulation). For treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE), there is a 98% likelihood that rivaroxaban is cost saving compared with warfarin (SOR: B, cost‐effectiveness simulation).