ArticleCureus2025
Assessment of Time in Therapeutic Range (TTR) in a Primary Care Warfarin Clinic.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Emerging strategies in venous thromboembolism: a narrative review of pharmacological innovations.Thrombosis journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Anticoagulation is commonly used to prevent thromboembolic events. Warfarin is a cost-effective, widely used anticoagulant that requires close monitoring due to its narrow therapeutic index. Time in therapeutic range (TTR) is a measure of international normalized ratio (INR) control. Using a retrospective approach, we evaluated the TTR of patients using warfarin for anticoagulation in our state-owned urban primary care clinic. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult patients on warfarin therapy followed at an urban Level 1 trauma center's ambulatory clinic from January to December 2024. Patients with at least two contiguous INR visits over a two-month period were included. Data on warfarin dosing, INR values, anticoagulation visit history, and demographics were extracted from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was TTR, calculated using the traditional method. Statistical analysis was performed using R-studio. Results Overall, 103 patients were analyzed in our clinic. The average TTR was 46.7% for this population. Around 17.5% of patients had a TTR >70%, and 30.1% had a TTR >60%. Approximately 29.1% of patients presented with high bleeding risk (INR >4.5) at least once during the measured time period, with 5.8% of patients requiring ED visits for significant elevations in INR. Variables such as gender, age, and insurance status did not significantly contribute to measured TTR. Conclusions The average TTR of our patient population was suboptimal. These findings highlight the need for more targeted quality improvement efforts to enhance anticoagulation management in our primary care clinic. Further evaluation of our current protocol with the help of pharmacists and the enhancement of patient education may be beneficial in achieving this goal.
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.