Trial reportScandinavian journal of primary health care2017
Warfarin monitoring in nursing homes assessed by case histories. Do recommendations and electronic alerts affect judgements?
Trial report in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Treatment of atrial fibrillation in nursing homes: A place for direct acting oral anticoagulants?The journal of nursing home research sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOlder adults treated with warfarin are prone to complications, and high-quality monitoring is essential. The aim of this case history based study was to assess the quality of warfarin monitoring in a routine situation, and in a situation with an antibiotic-warfarin interaction, before and after receiving an electronic alert. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn April 2014, a national web-based survey with two case histories was distributed among Norwegian nursing home physicians and general practitioners working part-time in nursing homes. Case A represented a patient on stable warfarin treatment, but with a substantial INR increase within the therapeutic interval. Case B represented a more challenging patient with trimethoprim sulfamethoxazole (TMS) treatment due to pyelonephritis. In both cases, the physicians were asked to state the next warfarin dose and the INR recall interval. In case B, the physicians could change their suggestions after receiving an electronic alert on the TMS-warfarin interaction.
resultsThree hundred and ninety eight physicians in 292 nursing homes responded. Suggested INR recall intervals and warfarin doses varied substantially in both cases. In case A, 61% gave acceptable answers according to published recommendations, while only 9% did so for case B. Regarding the TMS-warfarin interaction in case history B, the electronic alert increased the percentage of respondents correctly suggesting a dose reduction from 29% to 53%. Having an INR instrument in the nursing home was associated with shortened INR recall times.
conclusionsPractical advice on handling of warfarin treatment and drug interactions is needed. Electronic alerts as presented in electronic medical records seem insufficient to change practice. Availability of INR instruments may be important regarding recall time.
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.