Reliability of CoaguChek Pro II Point of Care System in Outpatient Setting in Farwaniya Hospital, Kuwait

A. Thabet, Danah Al-Shatti, Mohamed Elrahwan
{"title":"Reliability of CoaguChek Pro II Point of Care System in Outpatient Setting in Farwaniya Hospital, Kuwait","authors":"A. Thabet, Danah Al-Shatti, Mohamed Elrahwan","doi":"10.11648/J.AJLM.20210603.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Point of care testing (POCT) coagulometers are widely used for international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring for patients on vitamin K antagonists (VKA) therapy. In our study, we investigated the accuracy and reliability of CoaguChek pro II (Roche Diagnostics) as an alternative for standard laboratory testing (SLT) by ACL TOP 500 top system in outpatient department setting. Methods: We enrolled a total of 174 INR results in our study which were measured by CoaguChek ProII and ACL TOP 500 top. The three arms of the study were: INR <3.5, 3.5-4.4, and ≥4.5. The results were compared using Passing Bablok regression analysis and Bland-Altman plot. The agreement between the two methods was further evaluated to demonstrate the impact on dosing decision. Furthermore, the degree of patient satisfaction with POCT in our INR clinic was assessed by participating in a survey. Results: The overall correlation of INR measurements between POCT and SLT in our study was strong (r = 0.95), however, the correlation between the two methods in the 3.5-4.4 arm was moderate (r = 0.502). The overall agreement between the two methods in all three arms of the study in terms of dosing decision was good (Kappa = 0.862), with only 12.6% of INR measurements showing a difference in dosing decision. Ninety-Seven percent of all INR values measured by CoaguChek Pro II within therapeutic range (INR<3.5) were within 0.5 INR units when compared to ACL TOP 500 Top. Furthermore, we concluded that more than 90% of the patients in our center were satisfied with the POC service. Conclusion: We concluded that POCT is a good alternative to SLT in INR values falling in therapeutic and supra-therapeutic ranges; however, additional comparative studies investigating the accuracy and reliability between the two methods for INR results between 3.5-4.4 will add to the current body of knowledge. Furthermore, the majority of patients were satisfied with the service provided in the POC INR clinic.","PeriodicalId":320526,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Laboratory Medicine","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11648/J.AJLM.20210603.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Point of care testing (POCT) coagulometers are widely used for international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring for patients on vitamin K antagonists (VKA) therapy. In our study, we investigated the accuracy and reliability of CoaguChek pro II (Roche Diagnostics) as an alternative for standard laboratory testing (SLT) by ACL TOP 500 top system in outpatient department setting. Methods: We enrolled a total of 174 INR results in our study which were measured by CoaguChek ProII and ACL TOP 500 top. The three arms of the study were: INR <3.5, 3.5-4.4, and ≥4.5. The results were compared using Passing Bablok regression analysis and Bland-Altman plot. The agreement between the two methods was further evaluated to demonstrate the impact on dosing decision. Furthermore, the degree of patient satisfaction with POCT in our INR clinic was assessed by participating in a survey. Results: The overall correlation of INR measurements between POCT and SLT in our study was strong (r = 0.95), however, the correlation between the two methods in the 3.5-4.4 arm was moderate (r = 0.502). The overall agreement between the two methods in all three arms of the study in terms of dosing decision was good (Kappa = 0.862), with only 12.6% of INR measurements showing a difference in dosing decision. Ninety-Seven percent of all INR values measured by CoaguChek Pro II within therapeutic range (INR<3.5) were within 0.5 INR units when compared to ACL TOP 500 Top. Furthermore, we concluded that more than 90% of the patients in our center were satisfied with the POC service. Conclusion: We concluded that POCT is a good alternative to SLT in INR values falling in therapeutic and supra-therapeutic ranges; however, additional comparative studies investigating the accuracy and reliability between the two methods for INR results between 3.5-4.4 will add to the current body of knowledge. Furthermore, the majority of patients were satisfied with the service provided in the POC INR clinic.
CoaguChek Pro II护理点系统在科威特Farwaniya医院门诊环境中的可靠性
护理点检测(POCT)凝血仪被广泛用于维生素K拮抗剂(VKA)治疗患者的国际标准化比率(INR)监测。在我们的研究中,我们调查了CoaguChek pro II(罗氏诊断)作为门诊设置ACL TOP 500顶级系统标准实验室检测(SLT)的替代方案的准确性和可靠性。方法:本研究共纳入174例INR结果,采用CoaguChek ProII和ACL TOP 500 TOP进行测量。研究的三个组分别为:INR <3.5、3.5-4.4和≥4.5。采用Passing Bablok回归分析和Bland-Altman图对结果进行比较。进一步评估了两种方法之间的一致性,以证明对剂量决策的影响。此外,通过参与调查来评估我们INR诊所的患者对POCT的满意度。结果:在我们的研究中,POCT与SLT的INR测量的总体相关性很强(r = 0.95),但在3.5-4.4组中,两种方法之间的相关性为中等(r = 0.502)。两种方法在研究的所有三个组中在给药决策方面的总体一致性很好(Kappa = 0.862),只有12.6%的INR测量显示在给药决策方面存在差异。与ACL TOP 500 TOP相比,CoaguChek Pro II在治疗范围内(INR<3.5)测量的所有INR值中有97%在0.5 INR单位内。此外,我们得出的结论是,超过90%的患者在我中心的POC服务满意。结论:在治疗和超治疗范围内,POCT是SLT较好的替代方案;然而,调查两种方法在3.5-4.4之间INR结果的准确性和可靠性的额外比较研究将增加现有的知识体系。此外,大多数患者对POC INR诊所提供的服务感到满意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信