Sunderji Rubina, Gin Kenneth, Shalansky Karen, Carter Cedric, Chambers Keith, Davies Cheryl, Schwartz Linda, Fung Anthony
Cardiology, Pharmaceutical Sciences Clinical Service Unit, Vancouver General Hospital, BC, Canada.
Am J Clin Pathol. 2005 Feb;123(2):184-8.
Patients using anticoagulation point-of-care (POC) monitors are advised to periodically test these systems against laboratory methods to monitor performance. The international normalized ratio (INR), however, can vary between test systems owing to different instrument-reagent combinations. In a randomized study evaluating warfarin self-management, we compared INR measured by patients on a POC monitor (ProTime, International Technidyne Corporation, Edison, NJ) with those obtained at a hospital laboratory within 1 hour Ninety-one paired INR determinations from 55 patients met inclusion criteria. Clinical agreement in which POC and laboratory INR were within or outside the target INR range occurred in 56 (62%) of 91 cases (kappa = 0.35). The mean (SD) difference between POC and laboratory INR was 0.44 (0.61). Six pairs differed by 1 or more INR units, 3 at study initiation resulting in POC monitor replacement. The accuracy of INR self-testing with ProTime was acceptable. The small failure rate of INR agreement might be clinically important, suggesting the need for external quality control systems.
建议使用即时检验(POC)抗凝监测仪的患者定期采用实验室方法对这些系统进行检测,以监测其性能。然而,由于仪器与试剂组合不同,国际标准化比值(INR)在不同检测系统之间可能会有所差异。在一项评估华法林自我管理的随机研究中,我们将患者使用POC监测仪(ProTime,国际技术公司,新泽西州爱迪生市)测得的INR与1小时内在医院实验室测得的INR进行了比较。来自55名患者的91对配对INR测定结果符合纳入标准。POC和实验室INR在目标INR范围内或范围外的临床一致性在91例中有56例(62%)出现(kappa值 = 0.35)。POC与实验室INR之间的平均(标准差)差值为0.44(0.61)。有6对的INR相差1个或更多单位,3对在研究开始时相差如此,导致更换了POC监测仪。使用ProTime进行INR自我检测的准确性是可以接受的。INR一致性的低失败率可能在临床上具有重要意义,这表明需要外部质量控制系统。