This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Informatics/ Internet in Medicine  • Telemedicine  • Thrombolysis  • Medical Practice, Other  • Venous Thromboembolism  • Cardiovascular System  • Prognosis/ Outcomes  • Adverse Effects  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Anthony G. Staresinic, PharmD; Christine A. Sorkness, PharmD; Brian M. Goodman, PhD; Denise Walbrandt Pigarelli, PharmD

Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:997-1002.

Background  Studies demonstrate the effectiveness of anticoagulation management service (AMS) in providing antithrombotic therapy for eligible patients. We sought to extend this concept by determining whether an interim telephone model (IT) is comparable to our current AMS model at achieving optimal therapeutic outcomes.

Methods  The 36-month trial (24-month study plus 12-month extension) enrolled 192 eligible patients receiving long-term warfarin therapy at a Veterans Affairs hospital. Consenting participants were randomly assigned to either our current face-to-face clinic model (AMS), or our IT model. The primary outcome was the percentage of time individuals' international normalized ratios (INRs) were maintained within their target INR range (2.0-3.0 or 2.5-3.5). Secondary outcomes included the number of adverse events (eg, thromboembolism or hemorrhage) experienced during the study.

Results  We found no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in the percentage of time maintained within INR target range overall (55.1% for AMS; 57.8% for IT; P = .28) nor over the course of the study. There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of thromboembolic or serious bleeding events between IT and AMS participants. Nevertheless, we did note differences related to intensity of anticoagulation. The IT group receiving treatment at a higher intensity (INR, 2.5-3.5) experienced greater anticoagulation control (P = .04) and fewer complications than the AMS group. The IT participants, however, reported a significantly higher rate of minor bleeding events, experienced mainly by those at an INR range of 2.0 to 3.0.

Conclusion  Our IT model is a viable modification of our AMS model for the management of patients undergoing chronic anticoagulant therapy.

Author Affiliations: Pharmacy Practice Division, University of Wisconsin School of Pharmacy (Drs Staresinic, Sorkness, Goodman, and Pigarelli), and William S. Middleton Veterans Affairs Hospital (Drs Sorkness and Pigarelli), Madison, Wis. Dr Staresinic is now with Navitus Health Solutions, Madison, Wis.

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

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Thrice weekly warfarin administration in haemodialysis patients
Sood et al.
Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009;24:3162-3167.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Evaluating the impact of study-level factors on warfarin control in U.S.-based primary studies: A meta-analysis
Cios et al.
Am J Health Syst Pharm 2009;66:916-925.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Anticoagulation intensity and outcomes among patients prescribed oral anticoagulant therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Oake et al.
CMAJ 2008;179:235-244.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Quality of Clinical Documentation and Anticoagulation Control in Patients With Chronic Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation in Routine Medical Care
Ansell et al.
American Journal of Medical Quality 2007;22:327-333.
ABSTRACT