scholarly journals A New Method for the Measurement of International Normalized Ratio in Hemodialysis Patients with Heparin-Locked Tunneled Dialysis Catheters

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Céline B. Seghers ◽  
Kristien Ver Elst ◽  
Jolien Claessens ◽  
Steven Weekx ◽  
Sigrid Vermeiren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Point Of Care ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Hemodialysis Patients ◽  
Blood Sampling ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Heparin Concentration ◽  
Finger Prick ◽  
Catheter Site

Background. To measure International Normalized Ratio (INR) in hemodialysis patients with tunneled dialysis catheters (TDCs), blood sampling is frequently obtained via the catheter at the start of the session. INR measurements via finger-prick point of care testing (POCT) and via blood sampling taken from the dialysis circuit are evaluated as alternatives. Methods. In 14 hemodialysis patients with TDCs, treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKA), INR measurements via POCT were compared with plasma INR samples taken via the catheter at the start of dialysis and via the dialysis circuit after 30 and 60 minutes during 3 nonconsecutive dialysis sessions. Results. Blood samples taken at the start of dialysis at the catheter site were frequently contaminated with heparin originating from the locking solution (unfractionated heparin concentration (UFH) >1.0 IU/ml in 13.2%). POCT INR at the start of dialysis was not different from plasma INR after 30 and 60 minutes (Wilcoxon test p = 0.113 , n = 37, and p = 0.631 , n = 36, respectively). Moreover, there was no difference between POCT INR at the start of dialysis and POCT INR after 30 and 60 minutes (Wilcoxon test p = 0.797 and p = 0.801, respectively; n = 36). Passing and Bablok regression equation was used, y = 0.460 + 0.733x; n = 105. Treatment decisions based on these 2 methods showed a very good overall agreement (kappa = 0.810; 95% CI: 0.732–0.889; n = 105). Conclusions. Measuring plasma INR via the TDC at the start of dialysis should be abandoned. Measuring POCT INR via a finger prick at the start or even after 30 to 60 minutes is an alternative. The most elegant alternative is to take plasma INR samples via the dialysis circuit 30 minutes or later after the start of the dialysis.

Accuracy of the CoaguChek XS for point-of-care international normalized ratio (INR) measurement in children requiring warfarin

2008 ◽  
Vol 99 (06) ◽  
pp. 1097-1103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karina Black ◽  
Mary Massicotte ◽  
Michelle Bauman ◽  
Stefan Kuhle ◽  
Susan Howlett-Clyne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Point Of Care ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Standard Laboratory ◽  
Limits Of Agreement ◽  
Time Points ◽  
Coaguchek Xs ◽  
Roche Diagnostics

SummaryPoint-of-care INR (POC INR) meters can provide a safe and effective method for monitoring oral vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in children. Stollery Children’s Hospital has a large POC INR meter loan program for children requiring oral VKAs. Our protocol requires that POC INR results be compared to the standard laboratory INR for each child on several consecutive tests to ensure accuracy of CoaguChek XS® (Roche Diagnostics, Basel Switzerland) meter. It was the objective of the study to determine the accuracy of the CoaguChek XS by comparing whole blood INR results from the CoaguChek XS to plasma INR results from the standard laboratory in children. POC INR meter validations were performed on plasma samples from two time points from 62 children receiving warfarin by drawing a venous blood sample for laboratory prothrombin (PT)-INR measurements and simultaneous INR determinations using the POC-INR meter. Agreement between CoaguChek XS INR and laboratory INR was assessed using Bland-Altman plots. Bland-Altman's 95% limits of agreement were 0.11 (-0.20; 0.42) and 0.13 (-0.22; 0.48) at the two time points, respectively. In conclusion, the CoaguChek XS meter appraisal generates an accurate and precise INR measure in children when compared to laboratory INR test results.

scholarly journals Patient acceptability of targeted risk-based detection of non-communicable diseases in a dental and pharmacy setting

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zehra Yonel ◽  
Asma Yahyouche ◽  
Zahra Jalal ◽  
Alistair James ◽  
Thomas Dietrich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vitamin D ◽  
Community Pharmacy ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Communicable Diseases ◽  
Blood Collection ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Patient Acceptability ◽  
Non Communicable Diseases ◽  
Finger Prick

Abstract Background Non-communicable diseases [NCDs] are the major cause of mortality globally and are increasing in prevalence. Different healthcare professionals’ access different population groups; and engaging allied healthcare professionals in risk-driven early case detection of certain NCDs may be beneficial, especially those who have not been tested for NCDs within the previous 12 months. The objectives of this study were to determine: whether NCD case finding in dental/community pharmacy settings is feasible in terms of patient acceptability, barriers to recruitment, impact on the existing service. Determine time taken to test for: type 2 diabetes risk [T2DM], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], hypertension, vitamin D deficiency and chronic kidney disease [CKD]. Determine whether there is added benefit of point of care testing [POCT] to identify diabetes risk compared to a validated screening questionnaire alone. Methods An exploratory study was undertaken to explore issues associated with NCD assessment in one dental practice and one community pharmacy within the West-Midlands, UK. Fifty patients > 40 years-of-age were recruited per site. Participants undertook: a questionnaire providing demographic data, any previous NCD diagnosis or positive family history. Validated questionnaires for determining NCD risk [T2DM/COPD]. Chair-side capillary blood [finger-prick] samples for HbA1C, creatinine/eGFR, Vitamin-D. Prior work had been undertaken to measure the agreement between point of care testing [POCT] devices and a central laboratory method, and to gauge the opinions of participants regarding discomfort experienced using venous (antecubital fossa) and capillary (finger-prick) blood collection, via a 10 cm Visual-Analogue-Scale. The POCT devices demonstrated good concordance with laboratory testing and were acceptable methods of blood collection for participants. Results Recruitment rates demonstrated that 8 days were needed to recruit 50 participants and 60% of those approached opted to participate. The principal barrier to participation was time, with average time taken to test being 19mins. Utilising dental and pharmacy settings identified potential cases of previously undiagnosed disease. Conclusions Risk-targeted testing for NCDs in high street dental and community pharmacies is both attractive and acceptable to patients.

scholarly journals Point-of-care coagulation testing for reducing in-hospital delay in thrombolysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 218-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung Hee Han ◽  
Seongsoo Jang ◽  
Mi-Ok Choi ◽  
Mi-Jeong Yoon ◽  
Seung-Bok Lim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Prothrombin Time ◽  
Laboratory Testing ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Interquartile Range ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Central Laboratory ◽  
Point Of Care Testing

Background: The confirmation of prothrombin time international normalized ratio by a central laboratory often delays intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Objectives: We investigated the feasibility, reliability, and usefulness of point-of-care determination of prothrombin time international normalized ratio for stroke thrombolysis. Methods: Among 312 patients with ischemic stroke, 202 who arrived at the emergency room within 4.5 h of stroke onset were enrolled in the study. Patients with lost orders for point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio or central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (n = 47) were excluded. We compared international normalized ratio values and the time interval from arrival to the report of test results (door-to-international normalized ratio time) between point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio. In patients who underwent thrombolysis, we compared the time interval from arrival to thrombolysis (door-to-needle time) between the current study population and historic cohort at our center. Results: In the 155 patients included in the study, the median door-to-international normalized ratio time was 9.0 min (interquartile range, 5.0–12.0 min) for point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and 46.0 min (interquartile range, 38.0–55.0 min) for central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (p < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient between point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was 0.975 (95% confidence interval: 0.966–0.982). Forty-nine of the 155 patients underwent intravenous thrombolysis. The door-to-needle time was significantly decreased after implementation of point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (median, 23.0 min; interquartile range, 16.0–29.8 vs median, 46.0 min; interquartile range, 33.5–50.5 min). Conclusion: Utilization of point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was feasible in the management of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was quick and reliable and had a pivotal role in expediting thrombolysis.

Point-of-care testing of the international normalized ratio in patients with antiphospholipid antibodies

2005 ◽  
Vol 94 (12) ◽  
pp. 1196-1202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory P. Samsa ◽  
Thomas L. Ortel ◽  
Stephanie L. Perry
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Whole Blood ◽  
Antiphospholipid Antibodies ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Factor X ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Laboratory Plasma ◽  
Finger Stick

SummaryAntiphospholipid antibodies can influence the results of clotting tests in a subset of patients, which can be a major obstacle in monitoring warfarin. The aim was to determine if point-of-care testing of the International Normalized Ratio (INR) is influenced by antiphospholipid antibodies. We compared 59 patients receiving warfarin for a diagnosis of antiphosphoipid antibody syndrome (APS) to 49 patients receiving warfarin for atrial fibrillation to evaluate the consistency between INR results obtained by different methods. INR results obtained by finger stick (capillary whole-blood) and venipuncture (non-citrated and citrated whole-blood) were compared with our laboratory plasma-based prothrombin time assay. Five patients (8%) with APS and both elevated anti-β2glycoprotein I levels and positive lupus anticoagulants had non-measurable ProTime® INR results and generally higher Hemochron® Signature INR results than the plasma-based method, but the corresponding chromogenic factor X results were not supratherapeutic. For the remaining patients, differences between the plasma-based INR and the point-of-care INR results ranged from 0.2±0.2 to 0.4±0.3. The differences were similar for patients with APS and atrial fibrillation for all INR comparisons with the exception of the plasma-based method compared with the ProTime, which showed a mean absolute difference of 0.4±0.3 for APS patients and of 0.2±0.2 for atrial fibrillation patients (p=0.02). In a subset ofAPS patients, the ProTime® system will not yield an INR result and the HEMochron Signature (citrate and non-citrate whole-blood) INR results will exhibit elevated INR results. For this subset of APS patients, we suggest using an alternative method to monitor warfarin.

Point-of-care testing INR: an overview

2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (6) ◽  
pp. 800-805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doris Barcellona ◽  
Lara Fenu ◽  
Francesco Marongiu
Keyword(s):  
Point Of Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Mechanical Valves ◽  
Self Testing ◽  
Periodic Monitoring ◽  
Monitoring Test ◽  
Pros And Cons

Abstract Oral anticoagulant therapies with the anti-vitamin K drugs (AVK), warfarin, acenocoumarol and phenprocoumon, are employed in primary and secondary anti-thrombotic prophylaxis in patients with venous thromboembolism, atrial fibrillation and cardiac mechanical valves. However, a monitoring test such as the International Normalized Ratio (INR) is required. The periodic monitoring of this therapy entails discomfort for the patients. Telemedicine and telecare can provide significant aid in the management of this therapy allowing patients to perform the test at home or anywhere else with a portable device, i.e. point-of-care testing (POCT), and to send the result to a thrombosis (TC) via web. Patients can receive dose adjustment sent back by the TC. The effectiveness of this type of management is equal or superior to the traditional AVK monitoring in terms of hemorrhagic and thrombotic events. Analysis of the costs with a horizon of 10 years reveals that both self-testing and self-management are cost-effective. The aim of this overview is to describe the pros and cons of the use of POCT as an alternative in the monitoring of AVK. In particular, description of the POCT, decentralization, quality of the therapy, safety and costs will be examined.

scholarly journals Comparison of Diagnostic Value between Point of Care Testing (POCT) and Standardize HbA1c Testing in Primary Health Care

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-68
Author(s):  
Achmad Rudijanto ◽  
Rulli Rosandi ◽  
Laksmi Sasiarini
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Primary Health Care ◽  
Hba1c Level ◽  
Good Accuracy ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Primary Health

Diabetes Mellitus is one of the biggest health problems. HbA1c is used to diagnose, to monitor treatment and treatment adjustment. High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) and electron spray mass spectrometry are recommended to measure HbA1c. But both methods need expensive cost, facility, and potentially increase health cost burden. HbA1c measurement using Point of Care Testing (POCT) is developed in Indonesia. POCT is more comfortable, has lower cost and easily brought to primary health care. Aim: to assess the clinical efficacy of POCT compared with a standard examination by HPLC. Methods: It is a cross-sectional observational study conducted at a first-level health facility (FKTP) in Malang. The subject population was patients who went to an outpatient unit in FKTP with inclusion criteria aged 20-75 years, were participants in the chronic disease management program (PROLANIS), both diabetes and non-diabetes. Results: Three hundred and thirty eight subjects were participated in this study. Five subjects were excluded because the presence of anemia. We used Wilcoxon test to compare HbA1c level between two methods and Rank Spearman correlation test to find correlation between two methods. This study showed measurement HbA1c level using POCT method had good accuracy (>80%). Other than diagnosis value, increased utilization of POCT HbA1c might also be caused by its portability and patient’s comfort. Conclusions: This study showed a strong correlation (R=0.016) between POCT HbA1c and standardized measurement. POCT HbA1c also showed good accuracy in all HbA1c groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document