Security and cost comparison of INR self-testing and conventional hospital INR testing in patients with mechanical heart valve replacement

Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery

Hong Jiang¹  Yu-qing Wang³  Bo Fu³  Shu-lin Zhao³  Yi-jun Dong²  Li Dong³  Qiu-lin Chen³ 

[1]Department of Clinical Laboratory, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P R China

[2]Department of Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P R China

[3]Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P R China

关键词: Cost;    Self-testing;    Portable coagulometer;    Anticoagulation therapy;    Heart valve replacement;   

Others  :  1136021
DOI  :  10.1186/s13019-015-0205-1

 received in 2014-08-23, accepted in 2015-01-07,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

International normalized ratio (INR) self-testing can improve the management of anticoagulation therapy with warfarin for the patients following mechanical heart valve replacement. Several reviews and studies have demonstrated self-management as an option to improve patient’s outcome considerably after mechanical heart valve replacement. We sought to analyze the security, economy and discuss the prospect of self-testing of anticoagulation therapy in patients following mechanical heart valve replacement in China, and evaluate the accuracy and stability of CoaguChek XS portable INR-testing device.

Methods

This was a prospective self-controlled clinical study conducted with 526 patients receiving oral warfarin anticoagulation therapy after mechanical heart valve replacement in the period of Mar.1, 2012 – Nov.1, 2012 in Cardiovascular Surgery Department of West China Hospital of Sichuan University. The same patient performed INR testing with CoaguChek XS portable coagulometer (group1) and central lab (group 2) in parallel. The follow-up time was 6 months. Meanwhile, a questionnaire was handed out to survey the expenses required for the re-examination visits to the hospital, time, and anticoagulation complications.

Results

No severe anticoagulation complications occurred in all the patients. No significant difference of the INR results were observed between group 1 and group 2, they showed significant relevance, r = 0.953(p < 0.05). Compared with the conventional method of INR testing in hospital, the portable coagulometer is convenient, quick and less traumatic. Self-testing of anticoagulation therapy reduced the cost and the time required for re-examination.

Conclusions

Results of CoaguChek XS monitor are precise and have a good consistency and stability as compared with traditional laboratory testing. For the patients receiving anticoagulation therapy after mechanical heart valve replacement, the self-testing of anticoagulation therapy with portable coagulometer is a safe choice, and it has a promising future application in China.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Chen et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Zheng-Xiang L: Development of Cardiac Valve Disease Treatment. Ling Nan Angiocardiopathy Magazine 2010, 201(05):343-51.
• [2]Dong L, Xu Jian P, Shi Ying K: Phasal Progress of Study on the Anticoagulation Individualization and Low Anticoagulation Standard after Valve Disease Sugery. Chin J Clin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2013, 2013(01):1-2.
• [3]Shah SG, Barnett J, Kuljis J, Hone K, Kaczmarski R: Factors determining patients' intentions to use point-of-care testing medical devices for self-monitoring: the case of international normalized ratio self-testing. Patient Prefer Adherence 2013, 2013(7):1-14.
• [4]Bussey HI, Linn WD: Warfarin and aspirin after heart-valve replacement. N Engl J Med 1994, 330(7):508-9.
• [5]Butchart EG, Payne N, Li HH, Buchan K, Mandana K, Grunkemeier GL: Better anticoagulation control improves survival after valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002, 123(4):715-23. 2002-04-01
• [6]Li D, Kang SY, Tian Zi P: Low Intensity Anticoagulant Therapy after Cardiac Mechanical Valve Replacement Surgery [J]. Chin J Surg 2003, 41(4):250-2.
• [7]Kneeland PP, Fang MC: Current issues in patient adherence and persistence: focus on anticoagulants for the treatment and prevention of thromboembolism. Patient Prefer Adherence 2010, 4:51-60. 2010-01-20
• [8]Horstkotte D, Piper C, Wiemer M: Optimal Frequency of Patient Monitoring and Intensity of Oral Anticoagulation Therapy in Valvular Heart Disease. J Thromb Thrombolysis 1998, 5(Suppl 1(3)):19-24. 1998-01-01
• [9]Heneghan C, Ward A, Perera R, Bankhead C, Fuller A, et al.: Self-Monitoring Trialist Collaboration: Self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet 2012, 379(9813):322-34. 2012-01-28
• [10]Koertke H, Zittermann A, Wagner O, Koerfer R: Self-management of oral anticoagulation therapy improves long-term survival in patients with mechanical heart valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2007, 83(1):24-9. 2007-01-01
• [11]Holm T, Deutch S, Lassen JF, Jastrup B, Husted SE, Heickendorff L: Prospective evaluation of the quality of oral anticoagulation management in an outpatient clinic and in general practices. Thromb Res 2002, 105(2):103-8. 2002-01-15
• [12]Heneghan C, Alonso-Coello P, Garcia-Alamino JM, Perera R, Meats E, Glasziou P: Self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2006, 367(9508):404-11. 2006-02-04
• [13]Grunau BE, Wiens MO, Harder KK: Patient self-management of warfarin therapy: pragmatic feasibility study in Canadian primary care. Can Fam Physician 2011, 57(8):e292-8. 2011-08-01
• [14]Yang J, Liu HY, Zhang Zhen L: Coagu Chek XS Clinical Application of National Standard Standardized Ratio Tester [J]. Ling Nan Angiocardiopathy Magazine 2009, 5:018.
• [15]Hong L, Chen Dai Y, Zhou Y, Lv Shu Z: Preliminary Study on the Clinical Application of Portable Coagulometer [J]. Chin J Cardiol 2008, 36(1):90.
• [16]Thompson JL, Sundt TM, Sarano ME, Santrach PJ, Schaff HV: In-Patient International Normalized Ratio Self-Testing Instruction After Mechanical Heart Valve Implantation. Ann Thorac Surg 2008, 85(6):2046-50.
• [17]Wells PS, Brown A, Jaffey J, McGahan L, Poon MC, Cimon K: Safety and effectiveness of point-of-care monitoring devices in patients on oral anticoagulant therapy: a meta-analysis. Open Med 2007, 1(3):e131-46. 2007-01-20
• [18]Fairweather RB, Ansell J, van den Besselaar AM, Brandt JT, Bussey HI, Poller L, et al.: College of American Pathologists Conference XXXI on laboratory monitoring of anticoagulant therapy: laboratory monitoring of oral anticoagulant therapy. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998, 122(9):768-81. 1998-09-01
• [19]Bereznicki LR, Jackson SL, Peterson GM, Jeffrey EC, Marsden KA, Jupe DM: Accuracy and clinical utility of the CoaguChek XS portable international normalised ratio monitor in a pilot study of warfarin home-monitoring. J Clin Pathol 2007, 60(3):311-4. 2007-03-01
• [20]Kong MC, Lim TG, Ng HJ, Chan YH, Lee LH: Feasibility, cost-effectiveness and patients' acceptance of point-of-care INR testing in a hospital-based anticoagulation clinic. Ann Hematol 2008, 87(11):905-10. 2008-11-01
• [21]Ansell J: Point-of-care patient self-monitoring of oral vitamin K antagonist therapy. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2013, 35(3):339-41.
• [22]Plüddemann A, Thompson M, Wolstenholme J, Price CP, Heneghan C: Point-of-care INR coagulometers for self-management of oral anticoagulation: primary care diagnostic technology update. Bri J Gen Pract 2012, 62(604):798-800.
• [23]Shen Xue-qin, Zhang li. Accuracy of international normalized ratio detected with CoaguChek XS [J]. Acad J Chinese PLA Med Sch, 2010 (12);1217–1218
• [24]Lee JH, Lee KS, Kim DS, Lee HS, Choi SI, Cho YG: [Evaluation of CoaguChek XS for measuring prothrombin time in patients receiving long-term oral anticoagulant therapy]. Korean J Lab Med 2007, 27(3):177-81. 2007-06-01
• [25]Plaza-Costa A, Garcia-Romero P, Poveda-Roda R, Bagan JV, Silvestre-Donat FJ, Cervero JA: A comparative study between INR and the determination of prothrombin time with the Coaguchek(r) portable coagulometer in the dental treatment of anticoagulated patients. Med Oral 2002, 7(2):130-5.
• [26]Christensen TD: Self-management of oral anticoagulant therapy: a review. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2004, 18(2):127-43. 2004-10-01
• [27]O'Shea SI, Arcasoy MO, Samsa G, Cummings SE, Thames EH, Surwit RS, et al.: Direct-to-patient expert system and home INR monitoring improves control of oral anticoagulation. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2008, 26(1):14-21. 2008-08-01
• [28]Voeller H, Dovifat C, Wegscheider K: Experience with INR self-management: patient selection and complication rates. Z Kardiol 2005, 94(12):801-7. 2005-12-01