Trial reportJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2015
The impact of frequency of patient self-testing of prothrombin time on time in target range within VA Cooperative Study #481: The Home INR Study (THINRS), a randomized, controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical service organisation for adults with atrial fibrillation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: optimal management of anticoagulation therapy.Blood advances · 2018Guideline
- At-Home Versus In-Clinic INR Monitoring: A Cost-Utility Analysis from The Home INR Study (THINRS).Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Trial
- The Effectiveness of Digital Therapeutics Intervention in Oral Anticoagulation Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a diagnostic model for AFP-negative hepatocellular carcinoma.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Combining portable coagulometers with the Internet: A new model of warfarin anticoagulation in patients following mechanical heart valve replacement.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- International normalized ratio for the guidance of warfarin treatment in elderly patients after cardiac valve replacement.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2019Article
- Anticoagulation after mechanical aortic valve implantation: is it time to act after PROACT?Annals of translational medicine · 2018Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of patient self-testing therapy of oral anticoagulation.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anticoagulation (AC) is effective in reducing thromboembolic events for individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) or mechanical heart valve (MHV), but maintaining patients in target range for international normalized ratio (INR) can be difficult. Evidence suggests increasing INR testing frequency can improve time in target range (TTR), but this can be impractical with in-clinic testing. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that more frequent patient-self testing (PST) via home monitoring increases TTR. This planned substudy was conducted as part of The Home INR Study, a randomized controlled trial of in-clinic INR testing every 4 weeks versus PST at three different intervals. The setting for this study was 6 VA centers across the United States. 1,029 candidates with AF or MHV were trained and tested for competency using ProTime INR meters; 787 patients were deemed competent and, after second consent, randomized across four arms: high quality AC management (HQACM) in a dedicated clinic, with venous INR testing once every 4 weeks; and telephone monitored PST once every 4 weeks; weekly; and twice weekly. The primary endpoint was TTR at 1-year follow-up. The secondary endpoints were: major bleed, stroke and death, and quality of life. Results showed that TTR increased as testing frequency increased (59.9 ± 16.7 %, 63.3 ± 14.3 %, and 66.8 ± 13.2 % [mean ± SD] for the groups that underwent PST every 4 weeks, weekly and twice weekly, respectively). The proportion of poorly managed patients (i.e., TTR <50 %) was significantly lower for groups that underwent PST versus HQACM, and the proportion decreased as testing frequency increased. Patients and their care providers were unblinded given the nature of PST and HQACM. In conclusion, more frequent PST improved TTR and reduced the proportion of poorly managed patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.