Key result
More frequent INR monitoring (<21 days) was associated with a lower percentage of INRs in the therapeutic range compared to intervals ≥21 days (75.1% vs 79.9%; p<0.001).
Why the study?
Does more frequent INR monitoring (<21 days) improve time in therapeutic range in adults receiving maintenance warfarin therapy compared to less frequent monitoring (≥21 days)?
Population
>700 adults receiving maintenance warfarin therapy managed by an anticoagulation clinic at the University of…
Comparison
INR monitoring interval of fewer than 21 days vs INR monitoring interval of 21 or more days
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
6 months (April 1, 2006 to September 30, 2006)
Authors
Loading...
Frequent INR monitoring was associated with lower TTR; leaves open whether intervals should be individualized in warfarin patients.
Observational (n=700)
No
Does more frequent INR monitoring (<21 days) improve time in therapeutic range in adults receiving maintenance warfarin therapy compared to less frequent monitoring (≥21 days)?
Absolute Event Rate: 75.1% vs 79.9%
p-value: p=< 0.001
More frequent INR monitoring (<21 days) does not improve time in therapeutic range compared to less frequent monitoring (≥21 days) in patients on maintenance warfarin therapy.
Snyder et al. (2008) conducted an observational in Maintenance warfarin therapy (n=700). INR monitoring interval < 21 days vs. INR monitoring interval ≥ 21 days was evaluated on Percentage of INRs within the therapeutic range (p=< 0.001). More frequent INR monitoring (<21 days) was associated with a lower percentage of INRs in the therapeutic range compared to intervals ≥21 days (75.1% vs 79.9%; p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: