Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35052000›Full record

ArticleBlood advances2022

Management strategies following slightly out-of-range INRs: watchful waiting vs dose changes.

Hallie B Remer, Xiaokui Gu, Brian Haymart, Geoffrey D Barnes, Mona A Ali, Eva Kline-Rogers, Tina Alexandris-Souphis, Jay H Kozlowski, James B Froehlich, Vinay Shah and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Blood advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

12 authors.

Hallie B RemerDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.ORCID 0000-0002-1651-5485
Xiaokui GuDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Brian HaymartDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Geoffrey D BarnesDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Mona A AliDepartment of Heart and Vascular Services, Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, MI.ORCID 0000-0003-2416-6702
Eva Kline-RogersDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Tina Alexandris-SouphisDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Jay H KozlowskiDetroit Medical Center, Detroit, MI; and.
James B FroehlichDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Vinay ShahDivision of Hospital Medicine, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI.ORCID 0000-0001-8489-3675
Gregory D KrolDivision of Hospital Medicine, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI.
Scott KaatzDivision of Hospital Medicine, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients' international normalized ratios (INRs) often fall slightly out of range. In these cases, the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines suggest maintaining the current warfarin dose and retesting the INR within the following 2 weeks (watchful waiting). We sought to determine whether watchful waiting or dose changes for slightly out-of-range INRs is more effective in obtaining in-range INRs at follow-up. INRs and management strategies of warfarin-treated patients within the Michigan Anticoagulation Quality Improvement Initiative registry were analyzed. Management strategies included watchful waiting or dose changes. INRs slightly out of range (target range 2.0-3.0) and their associated management were identified. Multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression was used to estimate the probability of the next INR being in range, adjusted for clustering due to multiple out-of-range INRs per patient. A total of 45 351 slightly out-of-range INRs (ranging 1.50-1.99 and 3.01-3.49) from 8288 patients were identified. The next INR was slightly less likely to be in range with watchful waiting than with a dose change (predicted probabilities 58.9% vs 60.0%, P = 0.024). Although a significant statistical difference was detected in the probabilities of the next INR being back in range when managed by a dose change compared with watchful waiting following a slightly out-of-range INR, the magnitude of the difference was small and unlikely to represent clinical importance. Our study supports the current guideline recommendations for watchful waiting in cases of slightly out-of-range INRs values.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsWarfarinHumansInternational Normalized RatioWatchful WaitingAnticoagulantsWarfarin

Identifiers

PMID35052000
PMCPMC9131906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.