 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Journal of the New Zealand Medical Association, 29-June-2012, Vol 125 No 1357 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
[full text] [PDF] Dabigatran: rational dose individualisation and monitoring guidance is needed
Stephen B Duffull, Daniel F B Wright, Hesham S Al-Sallami, Paul J Zufferey, James M Faed
AbstractDabigatran is the first oral anticoagulant to be introduced in New Zealand without prescribing restrictions for over 50 years. Not surprisingly, the drug has created a great deal of interest amongst health care providers as well as the general public and media. There seems to be a general feeling that warfarin, with its requisite dose adjustments and INR monitoring, is an outdated drug and should be shelved in favour of this novel agent. The assumption is that the newer drug must be better and safer as well as easier to use. Much of the literature associated with dabigatran encourages this view, stressing that dabigatran is a ‘game changer’ with the advantage of fixed dosing for most patients and no anticoagulation monitoring. In this paper we question whether dabigatran can really live up to these expectations. We suggest that the safe and effective prescribing of dabigatran, like all anticoagulants used in therapeutic doses, will most likely require dose individualisation and selective monitoring. This requirement should not be viewed as a failure for dabigatran but rather as a success for rational therapeutics.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | Current
issue | Search journal |
Archived issues | Classifieds
| Hotline (free ads) Subscribe | Contribute | Advertise | Contact Us | Copyright | Other journals |
|