Performance of a point-of-care device in determining prothrombin time in supra-therapeutic INRs

dc.creatorHashimoto, VAM
dc.creatorde Paula, EV
dc.creatorColella, MP
dc.creatorFiusa, MML
dc.creatorMontalvao, SAL
dc.creatorMachado, TFGS
dc.creatorOrsi, FA
dc.creatorAnnichino-Bizzacchi, JM
dc.date2013
dc.dateAPR
dc.date2014-07-30T14:31:06Z
dc.date2015-11-26T16:15:18Z
dc.date2014-07-30T14:31:06Z
dc.date2015-11-26T16:15:18Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-28T23:01:31Z
dc.date.available2018-03-28T23:01:31Z
dc.identifierInternational Journal Of Laboratory Hematology. Wiley-blackwell, v. 35, n. 2, n. 211, n. 216, 2013.
dc.identifier1751-5521
dc.identifierWOS:000316146600013
dc.identifier10.1111/ijlh.12026
dc.identifierhttp://www.repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/59259
dc.identifierhttp://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/59259
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/1267475
dc.descriptionFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
dc.descriptionIntroduction Point-of-care (POC) devices have been widely adopted for monitoring prothrombin time (PT) (INR) following the demonstration of their accuracy compared to standard INR determination. However, guidelines suggest confirmation of POC results when INRs increase above therapeutic range, due to concerns regarding possible inferior performance of POC devices in high INR levels. Unfortunately, patients with supra-therapeutic INRs are underrepresented in studies that validated these devices. Methods We performed a prospective evaluation of the performance of a POC device in monitoring oral anticoagulation in patients with INR values above 3.5 in a University outpatient anticoagulation clinic. During a 6-month period, 2322 INR determinations were performed with a POC device, and results above 3.5 were immediately repeated on an automated coagulometer. Results Dual INR determinations by two methods were obtained in 160 visits, with a mean INR from the POC device of 4.52 +/- 0.96. Both classical statistics and clinical concordance analysis yielded satisfactory results when the two methods were compared. Conclusion Our results demonstrate that POC devices present good correlation with standard laboratory methods for PT determination in supra-therapeutic INRs and that differences in clinical management do not support the need for systematic confirmation of these results in nonbleeding patients.
dc.description35
dc.description2
dc.description211
dc.description216
dc.descriptionFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.descriptionFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
dc.languageen
dc.publisherWiley-blackwell
dc.publisherHoboken
dc.publisherEUA
dc.relationInternational Journal Of Laboratory Hematology
dc.relationInt. J. Lab. Hematol.
dc.rightsfechado
dc.rightshttp://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-406071.html
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.subjectAnticoagulants
dc.subjectprothrombin time
dc.subjectpoint-of-care
dc.subjectwarfarin
dc.subjectvalidation
dc.subjectRelevant Diagnostic Errors
dc.subjectOral Anticoagulation
dc.subjectSystem
dc.subjectMonitor
dc.titlePerformance of a point-of-care device in determining prothrombin time in supra-therapeutic INRs
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución