Thrombosis research
-
Thrombosis research · Jan 2004
Comparative Study Clinical TrialQuality assurance program for whole blood prothrombin time-international normalized ratio point-of-care monitors used for patient self-testing to control oral anticoagulation.
Whole blood coagulation monitors are increasingly used for patient self-testing to control oral anticoagulation, but there are no comprehensive quality assurance (QA) programs to check their performance. We report on the experience with one of such programs applied in a field study where patients on prothrombin time (PT)-international normalized ratio (INR) self-testing were asked to bring their monitors to the anticoagulation clinic for checking. PT-INR testing was performed three times over 3 months with 14 patient's monitors and test strips on three recalcified QA plasmas by an experienced laboratory operator. ⋯ Monitors should be recalled periodically to the clinic where they have been prescribed to the patient. During each visit, the clinic may check the monitors and patient self-testing performance as described. Such comprehensive QA system would make monitoring of oral anticoagulant treatment by self-testing safer and more effective.
-
Thrombosis research · Jan 2004
Comparison between CoaguChek S- and Owren-type prothrombin time assay for monitoring anticoagulant therapy.
Anticoagulation therapy with warfarin is monitored by the prothrombin time (PT) assay. The PT is standardized using international normalized ratios (INRs). By keeping the INR within specific values, it is possible to reduce potential complications from the treatment. To facilitate the PT monitoring, point-of-care devices suitable for capillary whole blood measurements have been developed. The aims of this study were to compare the INR values obtained by such a device, CoaguChek S, with those obtained from the Owren-type PT assay and to evaluate the differences seen. ⋯ INR analysis of whole blood with CoaguChek S is comparable with INR measured in plasma with Owren chemistry. The activities of factor V and fibrinogen contribute to the deviation seen between the methods. Differences in sensitivity to antiphospholipid antibodies could not be demonstrated.