0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
ARTICLE |

Accuracy and Precision of a Portable Anticoagulation Monitor in a Clinical Setting

Stephen A. McCurdy, MD, MPH; Richard H. White, MD
Arch Intern Med. 1992;152(3):589-592. doi:10.1001/archinte.1992.00400150103019.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background. —  Office-based anticoagulation monitors offer significant advantages in convenience, yet their performance has been inadequately characterized.

Methods.—  We characterized the performance of a portable anticoagulation monitoring system with respect to precision and agreement with a reference laboratory. Eighty-five patients from a university outpatient anticoagulation clinic provided 143 whole blood sample pairs for evaluating agreement between the monitor and the laboratory. Fifty-four patients each provided a second pair of samples for assessing the monitor's precision, and 23 pairs of measurements from the reference laboratory were used for assessing the laboratory's precision. Anticoagulation was measured using International Normalized Ratio (INR) values. Agreement between monitor and laboratory was evaluated as the difference between paired measurements. Precision was calculated as the within-patient standard deviation based on paired values.

Results.—  Within the range of 2.0 to 3.0 INR units, the monitor yielded values that were up to 0.3 units higher on average than the laboratory values. Within the range of greater than 3.0 to 4.5 INR units, the monitor yielded values that were up to 0.5 units lower on average than the laboratory values. Seventy-five percent of paired monitor and laboratory values were within 0.7 INR units; 90% were within 0.9 units. Within-patient standard deviation was 0.23 units for the monitor and 0.19 units for the laboratory.

Conclusions.—  The monitor differed systematically from the laboratory and was moderately less precise. The magnitude of these effects was not great, however, and accuracy was best at around INR = 3.0, the border between low and high therapeutic ranges. The clinic-based monitor is useful for patients requiring frequent surveillance of anticoagulation status.(Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:589-592)

Topics

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

Figures

Tables

References

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 71

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();