Randomised comparison of a simple warfarin dosing algorithm versus a computerised anticoagulation management system for control of warfarin maintenance therapy

被引:22
作者
Nieuwlaat, Robby [1 ,2 ]
Hubers, Lowiek M. [1 ]
Spyropoulos, Alex C. [3 ]
Eikelboom, John W. [1 ,4 ]
Connolly, Benjamin J. [1 ]
Van Spall, Harriette G. C. [1 ,4 ]
Schulze, Karleen M. [1 ]
Cuddy, Spencer M. [1 ]
Stehouwer, Alexander C. [1 ]
Schulman, Sam [4 ]
Connolly, Stuart J. [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Populat Hlth Res Inst, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[2] McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Rochester, Med Ctr, Dept Med, Div Hematol & Oncol, Rochester, NY 14642 USA
[4] McMaster Univ, Dept Med, Hamilton, ON, Canada
关键词
Clinical studies; clinical trials; oral anticoagulants; management of disease; Stroke prevention; thrombosis; NORMALIZED RATIO CONTROL; ORAL ANTICOAGULANT; ATRIAL-FIBRILLATION; PREVENTION; EFFICACY; QUALITY; DOSAGE; STROKE;
D O I
10.1160/TH12-06-0433
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Excellent control of the international normalised ratio (INR) is associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients receiving warfarin and can be achieved by anticoagulation Clinics but is difficult in general practice Anticoagulation clinics have often used validated commercial computer systems to manage the INR, but these are not usually available to general practitioner. It was the objective of this study to perform a randomised trial of a simple one-step warfarin dosing algorithm against a widely used computerised dosing system. During the period of introduction of a commercial computerised warfarin dosing system (DAWN AC) to an anticoagulation clinic, patients were randomised to have warfarin in dosing algorithm or to those of the computerised system. The study tested if the computerised system was non-inferior to the existing algorithm for the primary outcome of time in therapeutic INR range of 2.0-3. (TTR), with a one-sided non-inferiority margin of 4.5%. There were 541 patients randomised to commercial computerised system and 527 to the algorithm. Median follow-up was 159 days. A dose recommendation was provided and followed in 91% of occasions for the computerised system and in 90% for the algorithm (p=0.03). The mean TTR was 71.0% (standard deviation [SD] 23.2) for the computerised system and 71.90% (SD 22.9) for the algorithm (difference 0.90% [95% confidence interval:-1.4% to 4.1%]; p-value for non-inferiority=0.002; p-value for superiority=0.34). In conclusion similar maintenance control of the INR was achieved with a simple one-step dosing algorithm and a commercial computerised management system.
引用
收藏
页码:1228 / 1235
页数:8
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] A randomized comparison of a computer-based dosing program with a manual system to monitor oral anticoagulant therapy
    Ageno, W
    Turpie, AGG
    [J]. THROMBOSIS RESEARCH, 1998, 91 (05) : 237 - 240
  • [2] Pharmacology and management of the vitamin K antagonists
    Ansell, Jack
    Hirsh, Jack
    Hylek, Elaine
    Jacobson, Alan
    Crowther, Mark
    Palareti, Gualtiero
    [J]. CHEST, 2008, 133 (06) : 160S - 198S
  • [3] The belgian improvement study on oral anticoagulation therapy: a randomized clinical trial
    Claes, N
    Buntinx, F
    Vijgen, J
    Arnout, J
    Vermylen, J
    Fieuws, S
    Van Loon, H
    [J]. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2005, 26 (20) : 2159 - 2165
  • [4] Benefit of Oral Anticoagulant Over Antiplatelet Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation Depends on the Quality of International Normalized Ratio Control Achieved by Centers and Countries as Measured by Time in Therapeutic Range
    Connolly, Stuart J.
    Pogue, Janice
    Eikelboom, John
    Flaker, Gregory
    Commerford, Patrick
    Franzosi, Maria Grazia
    Healey, Jeffrey S.
    Yusuf, Salim
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2008, 118 (20) : 2029 - 2037
  • [5] 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS Focused Updates Incorporated into the ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation
    Fuster, Valentin
    Ryden, Lars E.
    Cannom, Davis S.
    Crijns, Harry J.
    Curtis, Anne B.
    Ellenbogen, Kenneth A.
    Halperin, Jonathan L.
    Kay, G. Neal
    Le Huezey, Jean-Yves
    Lowe, James E.
    Olsson, S. Bertil
    Prystowsky, Eric N.
    Tamargo, Juan Luis
    Wann, L. Samuel
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2011, 123 (10) : E269 - E367
  • [6] Evidence-Based Management of Anticoagulant Therapy Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines
    Holbrook, Anne
    Schulman, Sam
    Witt, Daniel M.
    Vandvik, Per Olav
    Fish, Jason
    Kovacs, Michael J.
    Svensson, Peter J.
    Veenstra, David L.
    Crowther, Mark
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    [J]. CHEST, 2012, 141 (02) : E152S - E184S
  • [7] Evaluation of the pattern of treatment, level of anticoagulation control, and outcome of treatment with warfarin in patients with non-valvar atrial fibrillation: a record linkage study in a large British population
    Jones, M
    McEwan, P
    Morgan, CL
    Peters, JR
    Goodfellow, J
    Currie, CJ
    [J]. HEART, 2005, 91 (04) : 472 - 477
  • [8] Kim YK, 2010, J THROMB HAEMOST, V8, P101, DOI [10.1111/j.1538-7836.2009.03652.x, 10.14801/JAITC.2018.8.2.101]
  • [9] Efficacy of computer-aided dosing of warfarin among patients in a rehabilitation hospital
    Mitra, R
    Marciello, MA
    Brain, C
    Ahangar, B
    Burke, DT
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE & REHABILITATION, 2005, 84 (06) : 423 - 427
  • [10] Warfarin treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation: Observing outcomes associated with varying levels of INR control
    Morgan, Christopher Ll.
    McEwan, Phil
    Tukiendorf, Andrzej
    Robinson, Paul A.
    Clemens, Andreas
    Plumb, Jonathan M.
    [J]. THROMBOSIS RESEARCH, 2009, 124 (01) : 37 - 41