Key result
Warfarin dosing algorithms underpredict requirements in ~92% of patients needing high doses.
Meta-Analysis (n=1,492)
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
There is preliminary evidence to suggest that some published warfarin dosing algorithms produce biased maintenance dose predictions in patients who require higher than average doses. We conducted a meta‐analysis of warfarin dosing algorithms to determine if there exists a systematic under‐ or overprediction of dose requirements for patients requiring ≥7 mg/day across published algorithms. Medline and Embase databases were searched up to September 2015. We quantified the proportion of over‐ and underpredicted doses in patients whose observed maintenance dose was ≥7 mg/day. The meta‐analysis included 47 evaluations of 22 different warfarin dosing algorithms from 16 studies. The meta‐analysis included data from 1,492 patients who required warfarin doses of ≥7 mg/day. All 22 algorithms were found to underpredict warfarin dosing requirements in patients who required ≥7 mg/day by an average of 2.3 mg/day with a pooled estimate of underpredicted doses of 92.3% (95% confidence interval 90.3–94.1, I 2 = 24%).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saffian et al. (2017) conducted a meta-analysis in Patients requiring high maintenance warfarin doses (≥7 mg/day) (n=1,492). Warfarin dosing algorithms vs. Observed maintenance warfarin dose was evaluated on Proportion of underpredicted warfarin doses in patients requiring ≥7 mg/day (92.3%, 95% CI 90.3-94.1). Warfarin dosing algorithms underpredicted dose requirements in 92.3% (95% CI 90.3-94.1%) of patients requiring ≥7 mg/day by an average of 2.3 mg/day.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: