Accuracy and precision of the CoaguChek S versus laboratory INRs in a clinic

被引:22
作者
Havrda, DE
Hawk, TL
Marvin, CM
机构
[1] Univ Oklahoma, Hlth Sci Ctr, Coll Pharm, Oklahoma City, OK 73190 USA
[2] Univ Oklahoma, Coll Pharm, Dept Pharm, Oklahoma City, OK 73190 USA
[3] SW Oklahoma State Univ, Dept Pharm Practice, Weatherford, OK USA
关键词
anticoagulation; coagulation monitor; international normalized ratio; warfarin;
D O I
10.1345/aph.1A310
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: The CoaguChek S is the next-generation coagulation monitor for measuring the international normalized ratio (INR) that replaces the CoaguChek device. Studies are lacking comparing the CoaguChek S with local laboratory INR assessment to ensure its accuracy and precision for monitoring patients on anticoagulation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate accuracy, precision, and technical ease-of-use of the CoaguChek S compared with laboratory measurements. METHODS: Accuracy was evaluated in 101 patients by parallel assessment of INRs (CoaguChek S and laboratory); precision was evaluated in 31 patients using duplicate INRs from CoaguChek S and laboratory and from liquid quality controls. Accuracy was determined using orthogonal regression, Bland-Altman plot, and clinical applicability (INRs discrepant in categorization of INR goal and resulting in different therapeutic decisions). Precision was examined by comparing mean difference +/-SD between repeated INRs from CoaguChek S and laboratory, coefficient of variation (CV), and coefficient of repeatability (CR). The influence of low and elevated INRs on accuracy and precision was also examined. To assess ease-of-use of the monitor, the number of technical errors was recorded. RESULTS: The CoaguChek S significantly correlated to laboratory measurement (r = 0.93); 16.7% of INRs resulted in discrepant categorization and 24.5% would have required a different therapeutic plan. The CV and CR compared well between CoaguChek S and laboratory (6% vs. 4.9%; 0.455 vs. 0.346, respectively). When subgroups of INR values <4.0 and <3.0 were evaluated, the precision improved with both methods. Precision, based on liquid quality controls, was good (CV 4.6% = low-level; 3.3% = highlevel). The CoaguChek S was found to have an error rate of 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The CoaguChek S is an accurate and precise alternative to laboratory assessment of the INR at values <4.0; it is an efficient device with a low likelihood of errors during testing.
引用
收藏
页码:769 / 775
页数:7
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]   MEASUREMENT IN MEDICINE - THE ANALYSIS OF METHOD COMPARISON STUDIES [J].
ALTMAN, DG ;
BLAND, JM .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES D-THE STATISTICIAN, 1983, 32 (03) :307-317
[2]   Precision of patients' measurements of the international normalized ratio (INR) using a patient operated whole blood home coagulometer [J].
Attermann, J ;
Kynde, K ;
Hasenkam, JM .
THROMBOSIS RESEARCH, 1998, 92 (06) :287-291
[3]  
Bussey HI, 1997, PHARMACOTHERAPY, V17, P861
[4]   Accuracy, clinical correlation, and patient acceptance of two handheld prothrombin time monitoring devices in the ambulatory setting [J].
Chapman, DC ;
Stephens, MA ;
Hamann, GL ;
Bailey, LE ;
Dorko, CS .
ANNALS OF PHARMACOTHERAPY, 1999, 33 (7-8) :775-780
[5]   Accuracy of a portable international normalization ratio monitor in outpatients receiving long-term oral anticoagulant therapy: Comparison with a laboratory reference standard using clinically relevant criteria for agreement [J].
Douketis, JD ;
Lane, A ;
Milne, J ;
Ginsberg, JS .
THROMBOSIS RESEARCH, 1998, 92 (01) :11-17
[6]  
DUNCAN EM, 1994, THROMB HAEMOSTASIS, V72, P84
[7]   A comparison of point-of-gate instruments designed for monitoring oral anticoagulation with standard laboratory methods [J].
Gosselin, R ;
Owings, JT ;
White, RH ;
Hutchinson, R ;
Branch, J ;
Mahackian, K ;
Johnston, M ;
Larkin, EC .
THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2000, 83 (05) :698-703
[8]   Oral anticoagulants: Mechanism of action, clinical effectiveness, and optimal therapeutic range [J].
Hirsh, J ;
Dalen, JE ;
Anderson, DR ;
Poller, L ;
Bussey, H ;
Ansell, J ;
Deykin, D .
CHEST, 2001, 119 (01) :8S-21S
[9]   THE INTERNATIONAL NORMALIZED RATIO - A GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING AND CORRECTING ITS PROBLEMS [J].
HIRSH, J ;
POLLER, L .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1994, 154 (03) :282-288
[10]   Is the international normalised ratio (INR) reliable? A trial of comparative measurements in hospital laboratory and primary care settings [J].
Hobbs, FDR ;
Fitzmaurice, DA ;
Murray, ET ;
Holder, R ;
Rose, PE ;
Roper, JL .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 1999, 52 (07) :494-497