ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2019
Feasibility and safety of a 12-week INR follow-up protocol over 2 years in an anticoagulation clinic: a single-arm prospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of eHealth Tools in Anticoagulation Management After Cardiac Valve Replacement: Scoping Review Coupled With Bibliometric Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Article
- Pharmacotherapy of atrial fibrillation in COVID-19 patients.Cardiology journal · 2021Article
- Questions and Answers on Practical Thrombotic Issues in SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Guidance Document from the Italian Working Group on Atherosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2020Review
- Patient Satisfaction With Extended International Normalized Ratio Follow-up Intervals in a Veteran Population.The Annals of pharmacotherapy · 2020Article
- Impact of an extended International Normalized Ratio follow-up interval on healthcare use among veteran patients on stable warfarin doses.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2019Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The 2012 American College of Chest Physicians' guidelines recommended a 12-week INR follow-up interval may be appropriate for patients on stable warfarin doses. Limited evidence supports this recommendation. A single-arm, prospective cohort study over 24 months was completed in a Veterans Affairs anticoagulation clinic to determine the long-term feasibility and safety of implementing an extended INR follow-up interval in Veterans on stable doses of warfarin. Participants were required to have a stable warfarin dose for 6 months prior to enrollment. A prespecified protocol was used to titrate, extend, and manage the INR interval up to 12 weeks. Scheduling of extended INR intervals was a primary outcome. Safety outcomes included major and serious bleeding and thromboembolic events. A post-hoc comparison of baseline characteristics between individuals who were scheduled for at least 4 consecutive 12-week INR follow-up intervals and those who were not was completed. Of the 50 participants, 36 (72%) were scheduled for at least one 12-week interval and 15 (30%) were scheduled for 4 consecutive intervals. There were 2 thromboembolic events that occurred in 1 participant. There were 28 major and serious bleeding events in 19 participants; 8 occurred while on the extended INR interval. In the post-hoc analysis, no participants scheduled for 4 consecutive 12-week intervals had heart failure. Based on 2 years of monitoring, a 12-week INR follow-up interval using a detailed protocol with titration of INR interval extension appears feasible for a subset of patients. Patients with heart failure may not be suitable for this intervention.
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.