PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 31, 20260 citationsOpen Access

A gap analysis on warfarin dosing management of time in the therapeutic range among adult patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in the outpatient LVAD clinic

View Full Paper
ECEster CaballeroRobert Wood Johnson University Hospital

Key Points

  • This project aims to evaluate warfarin dosing management and the time in the therapeutic range among LVAD patients.
  • Retrospective gap analysis conducted at an outpatient LVAD clinic
  • Reviewed 31 patient charts, excluding 5 for analysis
  • Used the Rosendaal Method to calculate time in therapeutic range (TTR)
  • 58% of patients had poor anticoagulation control with TTR below 65%
  • 9 out of 16 patients with INR goal of 2 to 3 achieved TTR of 65% or better
  • All patients with an INR goal of 1.4 to 2.2 had TTR below 65%

Abstract

Purpose of ProjectDetermine if a gap analysis on warfarin dosing management of time in the therapeutic range (TTR) among patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) supports the adoption of a warfarin dosing algorithm in managing international normalized ratio (INR) levels in the LVAD ambulatory clinic.MethodThis was a retrospective gap analysis quality improvement project conducted at an outpatient LVAD clinic where four cardiologists and four nurse practitioners manage warfarin dose based on INR levels. ResultsA total of thirty-one charts were reviewed and identified as patients receiving LVAD support, and five charts were excluded from the gap analysis. The remaining charts consisted of twenty-two male and four female patients. The mean age was 57.8 years old. There were varying INR goals: 2 to 3, 2 to 2.5, and 1.4 to 2.2. Time in the therapeutic range was calculated using the Rosendaal Method, and poor anticoagulation control was defined as TTR less than 65%. Nine out of sixteen patients with an INR goal of 2 to 3 had TTR of 65% or better. Two patients with an INR goal of 2 to 2.5 were noted to have a TTR above 65%. All four patients with an INR goal of 1.4 to 2.2 had TTR less than 65%. Data revealed that 58% of the twenty-six patients had poor anticoagulation control. Implications for PracticeBased on these findings, the recommendation would be to share the results with key stakeholders and recommend adopting an evidence-based warfarin dosing algorithm. Following an algorithm would decrease practice discrepancies among the healthcare providers, leading to improved TTR goals. Future education is warranted among the providers and team members once the algorithm has been developed and approved.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ester Caballero (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bcf835783ba022b6fb89bhttps://doi.org/10.7282/t3-my2f-kz95
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Predictors of Warfarin Time in Therapeutic Range after Continuous‐Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device2019 · 22 citations
  2. 2Meta‐Analysis of Time in Therapeutic Range in Continuous‐Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients Receiving Warfarin2018 · 45 citations
  3. 3Elderly Disabled Patients in Oral Anticoagulation Treatment: An Evaluation of a Bioanalyst-Led Management Program Reaching an Average of 72% of Time in Therapeutic Range2014
  4. 4Optimizing Time in Therapeutic Range in Patients With HeartMate 3: Pharmacist-Led Anticoagulation Using Pharmacogenetics of Warfarin2026
  5. 5Evaluation of time in therapeutic range among patients receiving warfarin therapy: A retrospective cohort study at one private hospital in Thailand2021