Why the study?
Selection criteria in low-socioeconomic settings and the role of education in self-management of VKA therapy remain unclear.
Does self-management of vitamin K antagonist therapy improve the quality of anticoagulation compared to standard clinic monitoring in adult patients?
Does self-management of vitamin K antagonist therapy improve the quality of anticoagulation compared to standard clinic monitoring in adult patients?
Self-management of INR is feasible in low-socioeconomic settings and achieves similar overall time in therapeutic range compared to standard clinic monitoring, regardless of patient education level.
Education and socioeconomic status may influence VKA control quality in low-resource settings; leaves open optimal patient selection for self-management.
BACKGROUND: Self-management of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy may enhance the quality of anticoagulation compared with conventional monitoring; however, selection criteria in low-socioeconomic settings-and the role of education-remain unclear. This study aims to evaluate the effect of education level and socio-economic factors on the quality of anticoagulation control. METHODS: This single-center observational study included adult patients on VKA for ≥6 months; exclusions were age >70 years, prior life-threatening bleeding/thromboembolism, illiteracy without a co-resident caregiver, or refusal to join the study. Participants followed self-management (1-h training and a dose-INR algorithm with escalation rules) or standard clinic monitoring led by specialized nurses. Follow-up was conducted for 6 months. Primary endpoints were Roosendaal TTR and percentage of INR tests in range. RESULTS: A total of 589 participants were enrolled (self-management n = 295; standard n = 294); 6-month TTR was available for 524 patients (255 vs 269; respectively). Median [Q1-Q3] TTR was similar between groups (63% [41-85] vs 59% [44-79]; p = 0.55), as was the percentage of INR tests in range (57% [36-78] vs 57% [42-71]; p = 0.76). Using tests-in-range categories, self-management had higher rates of both adequate control (>70%) (36.6% vs 27.1%; p = 0.024) and poor control (<30%) (18.1% vs 10.8%; p = 0.018). Within the self-management group, Rosendaal TTR did not differ by education level (70.2%, 62.4%, 65.2%, and 58.3% for illiterate/primary/secondary/higher education; p = 0.66). CONCLUSION: Self-management of INR is feasible in low-socioeconomic settings and is not predicted by education level; rather, it requires structured training, demonstrated competency, and an effective health-support system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hussein et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: