This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Stephen A. McCurdy, MD, MPH; Richard H. White, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1992;152(3):589-592.

Abstract
Background. —
Office-based anticoagulation monitors offer significant advantages in convenience, yet their performance has been inadequately characterized.

Methods.—
We characterized the performance of a portable anticoagulation monitoring system with respect to precision and agreement with a reference laboratory. Eighty-five patients from a university outpatient anticoagulation clinic provided 143 whole blood sample pairs for evaluating agreement between the monitor and the laboratory. Fifty-four patients each provided a second pair of samples for assessing the monitor's precision, and 23 pairs of measurements from the reference laboratory were used for assessing the laboratory's precision. Anticoagulation was measured using International Normalized Ratio (INR) values. Agreement between monitor and laboratory was evaluated as the difference between paired measurements. Precision was calculated as the within-patient standard deviation based on paired values.

Results.—
Within the range of 2.0 to 3.0 INR units, the monitor yielded values that were up to 0.3 units higher on average than the laboratory values. Within the range of greater than 3.0 to 4.5 INR units, the monitor yielded values that were up to 0.5 units lower on average than the laboratory values. Seventy-five percent of paired monitor and laboratory values were within 0.7 INR units; 90% were within 0.9 units. Within-patient standard deviation was 0.23 units for the monitor and 0.19 units for the laboratory.

Conclusions.—
The monitor differed systematically from the laboratory and was moderately less precise. The magnitude of these effects was not great, however, and accuracy was best at around INR = 3.0, the border between low and high therapeutic ranges. The clinic-based monitor is useful for patients requiring frequent surveillance of anticoagulation status.

(Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:589-592)

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Davis, Medical Center.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication September 20, 1991.

Reprints not available.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Pharmacology and Management of the Vitamin K Antagonists: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition)
Ansell et al.
Chest 2008;133:160S-198S.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Accuracy and clinical utility of the CoaguChek XS portable international normalised ratio monitor in a pilot study of warfarin home-monitoring
Bereznicki et al.
J. Clin. Pathol. 2007;60:311-314.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Validity of Criteria Used to Evaluate Fingerstick Devices That Assess International Normalized Ratio
Shermock et al.
Med Decis Making 2006;26:239-246.
ABSTRACT  

Coagulation Assays
Bates and Weitz
Circulation 2005;112:e53-e60.
FULL TEXT  

Atherothrombotic Disorders: New Insights From Hematology
Andreotti and Becker
Circulation 2005;111:1855-1863.
FULL TEXT  

The Pharmacology and Management of the Vitamin K Antagonists: The Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy
Ansell et al.
Chest 2004;126:204S-233S.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reliability of international normalised ratios from two point of care test systems: comparison with conventional methods
Poller et al.
BMJ 2003;327:30.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Foundation guide to warfarin therapy
Hirsh et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:1633-1652.
FULL TEXT  

Near-patient testing for coagulopathy after cardiac surgery{dagger}
Johi et al.
Br J Anaesth 2003;90:499-501.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Foundation Guide to Warfarin Therapy
Hirsh et al.
Circulation 2003;107:1692-1711.
FULL TEXT  

Warfarin Therapy for an Octogenarian Who Has Atrial Fibrillation
Gage et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2001;134:465-474.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Managing Oral Anticoagulant Therapy
Ansell et al.
Chest 2001;119 :22S-38S.
FULL TEXT  

A Multicomponent Intervention To Prevent Major Bleeding Complications in Older Patients Receiving Warfarin: A Randomized, Controlled Trial
Beyth et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2000;133:687-695.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Advances in Therapy and the Management of Antithrombotic Drugs for Venous Thromboembolism
Ansell et al.
ASH Education Book 2000;2000:266-284.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Systematic review of near patient test evaluations in primary care
Delaney et al.
BMJ 1999;319:824-827.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Empowering Patients to Monitor and Manage Oral Anticoagulation Therapy
Ansell
JAMA 1999;281:182-183.
FULL TEXT  

A new mixed micellar preparation for oral vitamin K prophylaxis: randomised controlled comparison with an intramuscular formulation in breast fed infants
Greer et al.
Arch. Dis. Child. 1998;79:300-305.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Long-term Patient Self-management of Oral Anticoagulation
Ansell et al.
Arch Intern Med 1995;155:2185-2189.
ABSTRACT  

Accuracy of Laboratory and Portable Monitor International Normalized Ratio Determinations: Comparison With a Criterion Standard
Kaatz et al.
Arch Intern Med 1995;155:1861-1867.
ABSTRACT