Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33821238›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP2021

Appointment attendance and patient perception of drive-up INR testing in a rural anticoagulation clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Bryan Zobeck, Erin Carson, Martin MacDowell, Aaron Hunt, Austin Reeder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. COVID-19: Implications for Nursing and Health Care in the United States.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Drive-Through Anticoagulation Clinic During the COVID-19 Pandemic.The journal for nurse practitioners : JNP · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Impact of Pregnancy-Related Venous Thromboembolism on Quality of Patients' Lives.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Bryan ZobeckUniversity of Illinois Chicago College of Pharmacy Dixon Illinois USA.
Erin CarsonUniversity of Illinois Chicago College of Pharmacy/SwedishAmerican Health System Rockford Illinois USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1686-4239
Martin MacDowellUniversity of Illinois Dept. Family Medicine - National Center for Rural Health Professions and Dept. of Pharmacy Administration, College of Pharmacy Rockford Illinois USA.
Aaron HuntUniversity of Illinois Chicago College of Pharmacy Rockford Illinois USA.
Austin ReederUniversity of Illinois Chicago College of Pharmacy Rockford Illinois USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The Anticoagulation Forum and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend drive-up international normalized ratio (INR) testing to combat INR non-adherence and increase safety during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Patient perceptions and impact on attendance have not been studied. Objective: To assess appointment volume and patient perception after initiation of drive-up INR testing in a rural pharmacist-managed anticoagulation clinic. Methods: This cross-sectional cohort survey study offered each patient attending the anticoagulation clinic via drive-up or in-office visit a survey between May 27 and July 2, 2020. Patients testing off-site were excluded. Study end points included monthly patient volume, visit type preference, testing barriers, desired drive-up duration, and overall clinic satisfaction. Clinic appointment volume from October 2019 to June 2020 was collected retrospectively through a schedule review. Results: Sixty-four (80%) of 80 surveys offered were completed: 46.6% of respondents preferred drive-up testing, 26.7% indifferent, and 26.7% preferred in-office visits; 38.7% of respondents indicated a greater likelihood of continuing routine INR monitoring via drive-up testing. Of the respondents completing the survey curbside, 46% and 27% of respondents identified reduced COVID-19 transmission risk and ease of transportation as benefits of drive-up INR testing, respectively. March and April clinic volumes were 19% and 22% below average, respectively, returning to baseline after drive-up testing was implemented. Clinic rating before and after drive-up testing remained high at 2.75 on a scale of 0-3. While infection risk was identified as the biggest barrier to care by 32.8% of respondents, 59.3% of all respondents wanted drive-up testing to continue indefinitely. Conclusions: Drive-up INR testing improves patient attendance during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patient perception of drive-up testing is positive. About 46% of respondents preferred drive-up INR testing with telehealth follow-up and 59.3% of respondents want drive-up testing to continue indefinitely, which suggests this approach to INR testing as a potential method to allay barriers to routine monitoring beyond the scope of the pandemic.

Indexed as

coronavirusCOVID‐19international normalized ratiopharmaciststelemedicinewarfarin

Identifiers

PMID33821238
PMCPMC8014677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.