Self-monitoring of INR significantly reduces the rate of thromboembolic events (HR 0.51) compared to standard care, but does not significantly reduce the risk of major haemorrhage or death.
Does self-management using a home monitoring device for INR improve outcomes and accuracy in patients who require long-term anticoagulation treatment compared to standard practice?
Point-of-care INR self-management is as accurate as laboratory testing and significantly reduces thromboembolic events and mortality compared to standard clinic-based care.
Hazard Ratio: 0.51 (95% CI 0.31–0.85)
In patients who require long-term anticoagulation treatment, how accurate and effective is self-management using a home monitoring device for INR, compared to standard practice?
Plüddemann et al. (2012) conducted a review in Long-term oral anticoagulation therapy. Self-management and self-monitoring of INR using point-of-care coagulometers vs. Standard clinic-based care was evaluated on Thromboembolic events (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.85). Self-monitoring of INR significantly reduces the rate of thromboembolic events (HR 0.51) compared to standard care, but does not significantly reduce the risk of major haemorrhage or death.