Discrepancies in International Normalized Ratio Results between Instruments: A Model to Split the Variation into Subcomponents

被引:22
|
作者
Solvik, Una O. [1 ]
Petersen, Per H. [1 ]
Monsen, Grete [2 ]
Stavelin, Anne V. [1 ,2 ]
Sandberg, Sverre [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bergen, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Hlth Care, Fac Med & Dent, N-5020 Bergen, Norway
[2] Haraldsplass Hosp, Norwegian Qual Improvement Primary Care Labs NOKL, Bergen, Norway
[3] Haukeland Hosp, N-5021 Bergen, Norway
关键词
ORAL ANTICOAGULANT TREATMENT; PROTHROMBIN TIME; LUPUS ANTICOAGULANTS; TESTING DEVICES; INR; CALIBRATION; AGREEMENT; SENSITIVITY; REAGENTS; THERAPY;
D O I
10.1373/clinchem.2010.146233
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Observed differences between results obtained from comparison of instruments used to measure international normalized ratio (INR) have been higher than expected from the imprecision of the instruments. In this study the variation of these differences was divided into subcomponents, and each of the subcomponents was estimated. METHODS: Blood samples were collected at 4 different patient visits from each of 36 outpatients who were receiving warfarin treatment and were included in the study. INR was determined on 1 laboratory instrument (STA Compact (R)) and 3 point-of-care instruments (Simple Simon (R) PT, CoaguChek (R) XS, and INRatio (TM)). All 4 INR instruments were compared in pairs. Linear regression was used to correct for systematic deviations. The remaining variation of the differences was subdivided into between-subject, within-subject, and analytical variation in an ANOVA nested design. RESULTS: The mean difference between instruments varied between 1.0% and 14.3%. Between-subject variation of the differences (expressed as CV) varied between 3.3% and 7.4%, whereas within-subject variation of the differences was approximately 5% for all 6 comparisons. The analytical imprecision of the differences varied between 3.8% and 8.6%. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in INR between instruments were subdivided into calibration differences, between-and within-subject variation, and analytical imprecision. The magnitude of each subcomponent was estimated. Within results for individual patients the difference in INR between 2 instruments varied over time. The reasons for the between-and within-subject variations of the differences can probably be ascribed to different patient-specific effects in the patient plasma. To minimize this variation in a monitoring situation, each site and patient should use results from only 1 type of instrument. (c) 2010 American Association for Clinical Chemistry
引用
收藏
页码:1618 / 1626
页数:9
相关论文
共 46 条
  • [1] Effect of coagulation factors on discrepancies in International Normalized Ratio results between instruments
    Solvik, Una Orvim
    Roraas, Thomas Helge
    Petersen, Per Hyltoft
    Stavelin, Anne Vegard
    Monsen, Grete
    Sandberg, Sverre
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY AND LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2012, 50 (09) : 1611 - 1620
  • [2] A retrospective review of clinical international normalized ratio results and their implications
    Kassab, Moawia M.
    Radmer, Thomas W.
    Glore, James W.
    Visotcky, Alexis
    Robertson, Jared
    Degroot, Bradley
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION, 2011, 142 (11) : 1252 - 1257
  • [3] Reliability of International Normalized Ratio Results in the CoaguChek Pro II System in a Clinical Setting
    Cortina-de-la-Rosa, Evelyn
    Izaguirre-Avila, Raul
    Ramirez-Hernandez, Alejandro
    Romero-Arroyo, Maria-Oliva
    Cortes-Cortes, Karen
    CLINICAL AND APPLIED THROMBOSIS-HEMOSTASIS, 2023, 29
  • [4] International normalized ratio (INR) testing in Europe: between-laboratory comparability of test results obtained by Quick and Owren reagents
    Meijer, Piet
    Kynde, Karin
    van den Besselaar, Antonius M. H. P.
    Van Blerk, Marjan
    Woods, Timothy A. L.
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY AND LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2018, 56 (10) : 1698 - 1703
  • [5] THE INTERNATIONAL NORMALIZED RATIO AND UNCERTAINTY - VALIDATION OF A PROBABILISTIC MODEL
    CRITCHFIELD, GC
    BENNETT, ST
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 1994, 102 (01) : 115 - 122
  • [6] Intraindividual variation of the International Normalized Ratio in patients monitored with a recombinant human thromboplastin
    van Geest-Daalderop, J. H. H.
    Kraaijenhagen, R. J.
    van der Meer, F. J. M.
    van den Besselaar, A. M. H. P.
    JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2010, 8 (07) : 1641 - 1642
  • [7] Results of the First Randomized French Study Evaluating Self-Testing of the International Normalized Ratio
    Azarnoush, Kasra
    Camilleri, Lionel
    Aublet-Cuvelier, Bruno
    Geoffroy, Etienne
    Dauphin, Claire
    Dubray, Claude
    De Riberolles, Charles
    JOURNAL OF HEART VALVE DISEASE, 2011, 20 (05) : 518 - 525
  • [8] The Relationship Between Preoperative International Normalized Ratio and Postoperative Major Bleeding in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
    Zhang, Dafang
    Dyer, George S. M.
    Earp, Brandon E.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS GLOBAL RESEARCH AND REVIEWS, 2024, 8 (04):
  • [9] Continued harmonization of the international normalized ratio across a large laboratory network: Evidence of sustained low interlaboratory variation and bias after a change in instrumentation
    Favaloro, Emmanuel J.
    Arunachalam, Sandya
    Chapman, Kent
    Pasalic, Leonardo
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 2024, : 28 - 41
  • [10] Harmonizing the International Normalized Ratio (INR) Standardization of Methods and Use of Novel Strategies to Reduce Interlaboratory Variation and Bias
    Favaloro, Emmanuel J.
    McVicker, Wendy
    Lay, Michelle
    Ahuja, Monica
    Zhang, Yifang
    Hamdam, Sayed
    Hocker, Naomi
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 2016, 145 (02) : 191 - 202