Why the study?
Do near-patient coagulometers (Protime, Coaguchek, TAS) provide reliable INR results compared to laboratory methods in patients on long-term warfarin?
Population
19 patients receiving long-term warfarin treatment attending one inner-city general practice anticoagulation…
Comparison
Near-patient INR testing using three… vs Reference laboratory method for INR estimation.
Design
Cross-sectional
Follow-up
July to December 1997
Authors
Loading...
Potential for divergent management decisions warrants caution across devices; leaves open need for standardized validation of point-of-care INR testing.
Do near-patient coagulometers (Protime, Coaguchek, TAS) provide reliable INR results compared to laboratory methods in patients on long-term warfarin?
Near-patient coagulometers are safe and efficient for producing acceptable INR results in primary care, though adequate training is essential to minimize operator-dependent variability.
Murray et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: