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 ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

We read with interest the recent article by Fitzmaurice et al.¹ The primary outcome they reported was the point prevalence of patients achieving individual therapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) targets. Although the authors state that this method is routinely used in England, there is no clear consensus. In an attempt to standardize the evaluation of anticoagulant control, the INR was introduced, and disease-specific INR target ranges were recommended.

In recent years, a variety of methods have been used to evaluate therapeutic control of the INR in England and elsewhere. Some of the most widely used methods include the following: (1) the proportion of INRs within target ranges²; (2) the proportion of time spent within the individual target ranges³; (3) the proportion of INRs within the target range ± 10%⁴; and (4) the mean ± 1 SD INR for the clinic overall.⁵

There have been no recommendations for . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Oral Anticoagulation Management in Primary Care With the Use of Computerized Decision Support and Near-Patient Testing: A Randomized, Controlled Trial
David A. Fitzmaurice, F. D. Richard Hobbs, Ellen T. Murray, Roger L. Holder, Teresa F. Allan, and Peter E. Rose
Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(15):2343-2348.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Chronic unexplained fatigue * Author's reply
Baschetti
Postgrad. Med. J. 2002;78:763-763.
FULL TEXT