ArticleScientific reports2025
Laboratory risk management for INR alert values.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The International Normalized Ratio (INR) is a laboratory test used to monitor and adjust medication with vitamin K antagonists. The alert values of the INR obtained in the laboratory must be managed efficiently to provide the best management for the patient. The aim of the study was to evaluate the risk levels associated with INR alert values for the laboratory in a tertiary care hospital and compare the findings with the established benchmarks. The study was conducted from September 2023 to August 2024 at the Clinical Laboratory from Emergency County Clinical Hospital of Targu Mures. Both risk levels associated with the occurrence of alert values for INR > 4.5 and underlying causes of these values were assessed. Plasma samples collected in all wards were analyzed using Sysmex CS-2500 instrument. The sample's journey through the laboratory was analyzed. The risk was assessed and a daily probability of alert value occurrence for INR was calculated. A total number of 42,799 plasma samples were analyzed, out of which 347 (0.81%) had INR alert values and were collected from 246 patients, some having more than one sample collected. This study showed that INR alert values > 4.5 represent an Unacceptable risk level, with an expected daily occurrence of λ = 0.95 (61% probability of ≥ 1 event per day). The consequence is critical in the risk assessment matrix that corresponds to a frequent probability. The laboratory considered the risk of INR values > 4.5 to be unacceptable both as frequency and consequences. Incomplete documentations of phone communications and resampling delays (> 6 h in 30% of the samples) were identified as potential failure modes. Therefore, laboratories are expected to implement strict control measures to effectively mitigate this risk.
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.