Home-Anticoagulation Testing: Accuracy of Patient-Reported Values

Jacquelyn Quin, Laura Q. Rogers, Stephen Markwell, Thomas Butler, Robert McClafferty, Stephen Hazelrigg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Few studies have examined the accuracy of patient-reported international normalized (INR) values for home anticoagulation testing (HAT). Our study objectives were to assess this accuracy and compare the percentage time within therapeutic range (PTWTR) based on HAT data to that obtained with testing through an anticoagulation clinic service (ACS). Materials and methods: Forty-nine anticoagulated patients were enrolled in a year-long, prospective, crossover study comparing HAT to ACS testing. Patients performed HAT for 6 months and telephoned their INR values. Thereafter, devices were interrogated for the 30 most recent INR readings. Data accuracy was calculated for each patient as the percentage of correctly telephoned INR values divided by the total number of INR values common to both the device and the telephone logs. The device-based PTWTR was compared to the PTWTR based on ACS data. Results: Of the 49 enrolled patients, 32 completed the study protocol. The mean accuracy of reporting was 94.0 ± 13.0% (range, 48-100%); the median accuracy was 100%. Three patients had marked low accuracy (48, 60, 62%). No significant difference was seen between the PTWTR based on device data versus that obtained though the ACS (59.8 ± 15.7% versus 59.5 ± 19.4%, P = 0.48). Conclusions: The overall accuracy of patient-reported INR values is high and the PTWTR found with HAT is comparable to that obtained with clinic testing. However, the potential for noncompliance in a small number of patients raises the question of whether periodic confirmation of patient-reported INR values should be considered.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)189-193
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Surgical Research
Volume140
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 15 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Equipment and Supplies
Therapeutics
Telephone
Cross-Over Studies
Reading
Prospective Studies
Data Accuracy

Keywords

  • anticoagulation
  • monitoring devices
  • patient compliance
  • prothrombin times

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Quin, J., Rogers, L. Q., Markwell, S., Butler, T., McClafferty, R., & Hazelrigg, S. (2007). Home-Anticoagulation Testing: Accuracy of Patient-Reported Values. Journal of Surgical Research, 140(2), 189-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.036

Home-Anticoagulation Testing : Accuracy of Patient-Reported Values. / Quin, Jacquelyn; Rogers, Laura Q.; Markwell, Stephen; Butler, Thomas; McClafferty, Robert; Hazelrigg, Stephen.

In: Journal of Surgical Research, Vol. 140, No. 2, 15.05.2007, p. 189-193.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Quin, J, Rogers, LQ, Markwell, S, Butler, T, McClafferty, R & Hazelrigg, S 2007, 'Home-Anticoagulation Testing: Accuracy of Patient-Reported Values', Journal of Surgical Research, vol. 140, no. 2, pp. 189-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.036
Quin J, Rogers LQ, Markwell S, Butler T, McClafferty R, Hazelrigg S. Home-Anticoagulation Testing: Accuracy of Patient-Reported Values. Journal of Surgical Research. 2007 May 15;140(2):189-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.036
Quin, Jacquelyn ; Rogers, Laura Q. ; Markwell, Stephen ; Butler, Thomas ; McClafferty, Robert ; Hazelrigg, Stephen. / Home-Anticoagulation Testing : Accuracy of Patient-Reported Values. In: Journal of Surgical Research. 2007 ; Vol. 140, No. 2. pp. 189-193.
@article{72724bd1d0f54b37ad6e6f29c42729f5,
title = "Home-Anticoagulation Testing: Accuracy of Patient-Reported Values",
abstract = "Background: Few studies have examined the accuracy of patient-reported international normalized (INR) values for home anticoagulation testing (HAT). Our study objectives were to assess this accuracy and compare the percentage time within therapeutic range (PTWTR) based on HAT data to that obtained with testing through an anticoagulation clinic service (ACS). Materials and methods: Forty-nine anticoagulated patients were enrolled in a year-long, prospective, crossover study comparing HAT to ACS testing. Patients performed HAT for 6 months and telephoned their INR values. Thereafter, devices were interrogated for the 30 most recent INR readings. Data accuracy was calculated for each patient as the percentage of correctly telephoned INR values divided by the total number of INR values common to both the device and the telephone logs. The device-based PTWTR was compared to the PTWTR based on ACS data. Results: Of the 49 enrolled patients, 32 completed the study protocol. The mean accuracy of reporting was 94.0 ± 13.0{\%} (range, 48-100{\%}); the median accuracy was 100{\%}. Three patients had marked low accuracy (48, 60, 62{\%}). No significant difference was seen between the PTWTR based on device data versus that obtained though the ACS (59.8 ± 15.7{\%} versus 59.5 ± 19.4{\%}, P = 0.48). Conclusions: The overall accuracy of patient-reported INR values is high and the PTWTR found with HAT is comparable to that obtained with clinic testing. However, the potential for noncompliance in a small number of patients raises the question of whether periodic confirmation of patient-reported INR values should be considered.",
keywords = "anticoagulation, monitoring devices, patient compliance, prothrombin times",
author = "Jacquelyn Quin and Rogers, {Laura Q.} and Stephen Markwell and Thomas Butler and Robert McClafferty and Stephen Hazelrigg",
year = "2007",
month = "5",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.036",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "140",
pages = "189--193",
journal = "Journal of Surgical Research",
issn = "0022-4804",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Home-Anticoagulation Testing

T2 - Accuracy of Patient-Reported Values

AU - Quin, Jacquelyn

AU - Rogers, Laura Q.

AU - Markwell, Stephen

AU - Butler, Thomas

AU - McClafferty, Robert

AU - Hazelrigg, Stephen

PY - 2007/5/15

Y1 - 2007/5/15

N2 - Background: Few studies have examined the accuracy of patient-reported international normalized (INR) values for home anticoagulation testing (HAT). Our study objectives were to assess this accuracy and compare the percentage time within therapeutic range (PTWTR) based on HAT data to that obtained with testing through an anticoagulation clinic service (ACS). Materials and methods: Forty-nine anticoagulated patients were enrolled in a year-long, prospective, crossover study comparing HAT to ACS testing. Patients performed HAT for 6 months and telephoned their INR values. Thereafter, devices were interrogated for the 30 most recent INR readings. Data accuracy was calculated for each patient as the percentage of correctly telephoned INR values divided by the total number of INR values common to both the device and the telephone logs. The device-based PTWTR was compared to the PTWTR based on ACS data. Results: Of the 49 enrolled patients, 32 completed the study protocol. The mean accuracy of reporting was 94.0 ± 13.0% (range, 48-100%); the median accuracy was 100%. Three patients had marked low accuracy (48, 60, 62%). No significant difference was seen between the PTWTR based on device data versus that obtained though the ACS (59.8 ± 15.7% versus 59.5 ± 19.4%, P = 0.48). Conclusions: The overall accuracy of patient-reported INR values is high and the PTWTR found with HAT is comparable to that obtained with clinic testing. However, the potential for noncompliance in a small number of patients raises the question of whether periodic confirmation of patient-reported INR values should be considered.

AB - Background: Few studies have examined the accuracy of patient-reported international normalized (INR) values for home anticoagulation testing (HAT). Our study objectives were to assess this accuracy and compare the percentage time within therapeutic range (PTWTR) based on HAT data to that obtained with testing through an anticoagulation clinic service (ACS). Materials and methods: Forty-nine anticoagulated patients were enrolled in a year-long, prospective, crossover study comparing HAT to ACS testing. Patients performed HAT for 6 months and telephoned their INR values. Thereafter, devices were interrogated for the 30 most recent INR readings. Data accuracy was calculated for each patient as the percentage of correctly telephoned INR values divided by the total number of INR values common to both the device and the telephone logs. The device-based PTWTR was compared to the PTWTR based on ACS data. Results: Of the 49 enrolled patients, 32 completed the study protocol. The mean accuracy of reporting was 94.0 ± 13.0% (range, 48-100%); the median accuracy was 100%. Three patients had marked low accuracy (48, 60, 62%). No significant difference was seen between the PTWTR based on device data versus that obtained though the ACS (59.8 ± 15.7% versus 59.5 ± 19.4%, P = 0.48). Conclusions: The overall accuracy of patient-reported INR values is high and the PTWTR found with HAT is comparable to that obtained with clinic testing. However, the potential for noncompliance in a small number of patients raises the question of whether periodic confirmation of patient-reported INR values should be considered.

KW - anticoagulation

KW - monitoring devices

KW - patient compliance

KW - prothrombin times

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34248171842&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34248171842&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.036

DO - 10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.036

M3 - Article

C2 - 17397870

AN - SCOPUS:34248171842

VL - 140

SP - 189

EP - 193

JO - Journal of Surgical Research

JF - Journal of Surgical Research

SN - 0022-4804

IS - 2

ER -