Quality Control and Oral Anticoagulation

Preparation of control blood for external quality assessment of point-of-care international normalized ratio testing in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to prepare control blood for an external quality assessment scheme (EQAS) for international normalized ratio (INR) point-of-care testing (POCT) in the Netherlands and to assess the performance of the participants.

METHODS

Control blood was prepared from dialyzed pooled patient plasma and washed human erythrocytes. Samples of control blood were mailed to participants of the Netherlands EQAS from October 2006 through December 2012.

RESULTS

Most participants used CoaguChek XS (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany) devices for POCT. The median between-center coefficient of variation (CV) of the reported INR decreased from 4.5% in 2006 to 2.6% in 2012. A few participants used the ProTime Microcoagulation System (ITC, Edison, NJ) for POCT. The median CV (per year) of the INR with the latter system was 7.0% to 10.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

The control blood samples were useful for external quality assessment in the Netherlands. The participants' performance with the CoaguChek XS system improved with time, demonstrating the value of external quality assessment.

External quality assessment of prothrombin time: The split‐sample model compared with external quality assessment with commercial control material

OBJECTIVE

CoaguChek S is a point-of-care, whole-blood, prothrombin time monitor. The purpose of this study was to compare two different methods for external quality assessments of CoaguChek S.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In the traditional external quality assessment scheme, commercial control material was sent to office laboratories and the results were compared with a method-specific target value. In the alternative external quality assessment (the split-sample survey) patient samples were analyzed on CoaguChek S at office laboratories, and venous blood samples from the same patients were analyzed at a hospital laboratory using an assigned comparison method. To obtain comparable performance criteria for the two methods, the limits for "good", "acceptable" and "poor" performance evaluation in the split-sample survey had to be expanded because of uncertainties in preanalytical factors and the comparison method.

RESULTS

In the traditional external quality assessment the total imprecision (between-office and within-office) was 8.0% at the low level (1.6 INR (International Normalized Ratio)) and 10.5% at the therapeutic level (3.4 INR). In the split-sample survey the total imprecision was 12.3% at the low level (2.1 INR) and 10.7 % at the high level (3.0 INR). Seventy-five percent of the participating office laboratories were characterized as "good" with the traditional external quality assessments, whereas the corresponding number was 73% using the split-sample model.

CONCLUSIONS

Available commercial control material for CoaguChek S is different from patient samples. This study demonstrates that split-sample survey is achievable, and is an acceptable alternative to traditional external quality assessment for point-of-care prothrombin time monitors where appropriate control material is difficult to obtain.

Improvement of coagulation laboratory practice in Thailand: the first-year experience of the national external quality assessment scheme for blood coagulation

CONTEXT

In Thailand until 2005 there had been no external quality assessment scheme at the national level for blood coagulation tests. Only a few laboratories had an external quality assessment for these tests. In the year 2005, the Thailand National External Quality Assessment Scheme for Blood Coagulation was founded.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the establishment of the Thailand National External Quality Assessment Scheme for Blood Coagulation (including problems encountered and solutions), its progression and expansion, and the improvement of coagulation laboratory practice in Thailand during 2 trial surveys and 4 formal surveys conducted in the first 1 1/2 years.

DESIGN

Between 2005 and 2006, the external quality assessment samples for prothrombin time/international normalized ratio and activated partial thromboplastin time were distributed to the participants as well as the instructions and suggestions for the improvement of laboratory practice. From the data collected, the all-method coefficient of variation of the international normalized ratio and activated partial thromboplastin time was calculated for each survey.

RESULTS

The number of participants increased during the first 1 1/2 years that the surveys were conducted, from 109 to 127. Survey data demonstrate an improvement in response rate and an increase in the number of laboratories that determine their own reference ranges and repeat this for every change of reagent lot, using the appropriate anticoagulant. The increased precision of tests is indicated by the decrease of the all-method coefficient of variation of the international normalized ratio and activated partial thromboplastin time. Examples of individual laboratory improvement through feedback are also described.

CONCLUSIONS

The improvement of coagulation laboratory practice both through the instructions provided and liaison with participants was observed during the course of this scheme.

Quality assurance for oral anticoagulation self management: a cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

External quality assessment (EQA) should be an inherent component of patient self management (PSM) of oral anticoagulation. The aim of this study was to evaluate methods of EQA for patients within a cluster randomized trial.

METHOD

After development of methods, general practises were randomly allocated to a formal EQA scheme of patients performing the test independently at home or at their practise with supervision. The supervised group of practises was further sub divided to test two other EQA methods: (i) venous sample compared with patients' point of care (POC) device; and (ii) patients POC compared with reference POC. Primary trial outcome measure was reliability of results from the formal scheme taking into account adherence and test errors.

RESULTS

Proportion of EQA scheme tests in range was 633/836 (75.7%). Proportion in range was significantly higher in group performing independently compared with supervised group, 80.1% vs. 71.5% respectively, P = 0.02. Sixty-six percent of tests were in range with venous compared with patients POC, and 88% in patients POC compared with reference POC.

CONCLUSION

Patients are able to undertake a formal EQA scheme and perform more reliably at home independently. There are satisfactory alternatives if a formal scheme is not acceptable.

Patient self-management of oral anticoagulation and external quality assessment procedures

The role of external quality assessment (EQA) is a contentious issue for patient self-management (PSM) of oral anticoagulation. Patients from general practices in the West Midlands undertaking PSM were recruited to compare efficacy of patients' and health professionals' EQA procedure using the UK National External Quality Assessment Scheme (NEQAS). Patients using Coaguchek (Roche Diagnostics) were trained to perform EQA as part of their PSM training. They undertook PSM for 26 weeks and were asked to perform EQA using material provided by the UK NEQAS twice at home without supervision and twice at the practice with supervision. Patients' results were compared with health care professional users of Coaguchek S. Twenty-three PSM patients were compared with 75 health care professional users of the NEQAS scheme. The PSM group international normalized ratio (INR) percentage time in range was 74%. There was no significant difference in the median results on NEQAS samples obtained by the patients and those obtained by professionals. Three patients were outwith consensus (results > 15% from the median INR) on more than one occasion. Patients were able to perform the EQA tests competently. The data show that good agreement can be achieved between patients analysing the same EQA samples, with coefficients of variation ranging from 22.3% to as low as 5.4%. Further study is required to determine how precision within these EQA schemes relates to the stability of treatment in patients' management of their own anticoagulation.

A randomized controlled trial of shared care versus routine care for patients receiving oral anticoagulant therapy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of a shared care programme (SCP), defined as a scheme based on shared responsibility, enhanced information exchange, continues medical education and explicit clinical guidelines, between general practitioners (GPs) and a hospital outpatient clinic (HOC), on oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT).

DESIGN

The study was a 2-year prospective, randomized, controlled trial, preceded by a 1-year period of observation.

SETTING

The HOC, GPs, and OAT patients in the admission area of Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus County, Denmark, covering 310 300 inhabitants.

SUBJECTS

A total of 207 GPs, including their enlisted patients on OAT, were invited, and 61.4% accepted participation. They were randomized into an intervention group [group-INT: 64 GPs and 453 patients (170 patients on OAT throughout the study period, i.e. full follow-up)], and a control group [group-CON: 63 GPs and 422 patients (173 with full follow-up)]. The remaining 80 GPs served as a nonresponder group (group-NON) of 485 patients (184 with full follow-up).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Therapeutic control of OAT in terms of time spent by the patients within the therapeutic interval (TI) of an international normalized ratio (INR) between 2.0 and 3.5.

RESULTS

The groups did not differ significantly with regard to age, sex, OAT indication, anticoagulant drug used, or the therapeutic control at baseline. In a comparison based on intention-to-treat principles, the therapeutic control increased statistical significance amongst patients with full follow-up in group-INT compared with group-CON (median time within TI: group INT = 86.6% vs. 80.5%, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

An SCP of anticoagulant management is effective in reducing patient time outside the therapeutic INR interval in OAT patients randomly assigned to an SCP, as compared with a control group.

Self-managed anticoagulation: results from a two-year prospective randomized trial with heart valve patients

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to assess the ability of patients receiving heart valve replacements to practice self-managed anticoagulation using a portable coagulometer.

METHODS

We carried out a prospective, randomized trial, comparing self-managed anticoagulation with conventional management. Patients practicing self-managed anticoagulation (51 patients) did so at home, measuring their international normalized ratio and then deciding on their dosage of warfarin, while conventionally controlled patients (n = 49) attended hospital clinics or were managed by their family physicians.

RESULTS

We successfully trained 41 of 44 patients who agreed to self-manage their anticoagulant therapy; 34 of the 41 managed their own anticoagulation at home for 2 years. Their control, assessed by a number of tests in range (67.6% versus 58.0%) and time in therapeutic range (76.5% versus 63.8%), was significantly better than that for the group managed conventionally (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in mortality or morbidity between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-managed anticoagulation is a reliable, easily learned method of controlling anticoagulation, and it is suitable for approximately two thirds of patients, with excellent results.

Enhanced standardization of the International Normalized Ratio through the use of plasma calibrants: a concise review

The INR was introduced in 1983 as a means of standardizing the prothrombin time test and improving management of patients receiving warfarin-based oral anticoagulant therapy. Despite the eventual widespread use of the INR system, unacceptable levels of inter-laboratory variation persist. The use of certified plasma calibrants has been studied as a means to reducing INR variation. This review examines the pre-analytical and analytical variables contributing to INR problems. Also, the findings of several multicenter studies in which plasma calibrants were deployed are presented. Issues such as the number of calibrants used and their composition, calibrant format, plasma citrate concentration, reference thromboplastins used, methods of calibrant certification and alternative techniques for local system calibration are examined. The development of consensus guidelines on the use of plasma calibrants for INR standardization is recommended.

A primary care evaluation of three near patient coagulometers

AIM

To compare the reliability and relative costs of three international normalised ratio (INR) near patient tests.

MATERIALS

Protime (ITC Technidyne), Coaguchek (Boehringer Mannheim), and TAS (Diagnostic Testing).

METHODS

All patients attending one inner city general practice anticoagulation clinic were asked to participate, with two samples provided by patients not taking warfarin. A 5 ml sample of venous whole blood was taken from each patient and a drop immediately added to the prepared Coaguchek test strip followed by the Protime cuvette. The remainder was added to a citrated bottle. A drop of citrated blood was then placed on the TAS test card and the remainder sent to the reference laboratory for analysis. Parallel INR estimation was performed on the different near patient tests at each weekly anticoagulation clinic from July to December 1997.

RESULTS

19 patients receiving long term warfarin treatment provided 62 INR results. INR results ranged from 0.8-8.2 overall and 1.0-5.7 based on the laboratory method. Taking the laboratory method as the gold standard, 12/62 results were < 2.0 and 2/62 were > 4.5. There were no statistical or clinically significant differences between results from the three systems, although all near patient tests showed slightly higher mean readings than the laboratory, and 19-24% of tests would have resulted in different management decisions based on the machine used in comparison with the laboratory INR value. The cost of the near patient test systems varied substantially.

CONCLUSIONS

All three near patient test systems are safe and efficient for producing acceptable and reproducible INR results within the therapeutic range in a primary care setting. All the systems were, however, subject to operator dependent variables at the time of blood letting. Adequate training in capillary blood sampling, specific use of the machines, and quality assurance procedures is therefore essential.

Is the international normalised ratio (INR) reliable? A trial of comparative measurements in hospital laboratory and primary care settings

AIM

To determine the reliability of international normalised ratio (INR) measurement in primary care by practice nurses using near patient testing (NPT), in comparison with results obtained within hospital laboratories by varied methods.

METHODS

As part of an MRC funded study into primary care oral anticoagulation management, INR measurements obtained in general practice were validated against values on the same samples obtained in hospital laboratories. A prospective comparative trial was undertaken between three hospital laboratories and nine general practices. All patients attending general practice based anticoagulant clinics had parallel INR estimations performed in general practice and in a hospital laboratory.

RESULTS

405 tests were performed. Comparison between results obtained in the practices and those in the reference hospital laboratory (gold standard), which used the same method of testing for INR, showed a correlation coefficient of 0.96. Correlation coefficients comparing the results with the various standard laboratory techniques ranged from 0.86 to 0.92. It was estimated that up to 53% of tests would have resulted in clinically significant differences (change in warfarin dose) depending upon the site and method of testing. The practice derived results showed a positive bias ranging from 0.28 to 1.55, depending upon the site and method of testing.

CONCLUSIONS

No technical problems associated with INR testing within primary care were uncovered. Discrepant INR results are as problematic in hospital settings as they are in primary care. These data highlight the failings of the INR to standardise when different techniques and reagents are used, an issue which needs to be resolved. For primary care to become more involved in therapeutic oral anticoagulation monitoring, close links are needed between hospital laboratories and practices, particularly with regard to training and quality assurance.

An international collaborative study on the INR calibration of freeze-dried reference plasmas

A study was carried out to calibrate potential European Reference Plasmas for prothrombin time (PT) standardization. The International Normalized Ratio (INR) values of three freeze-dried candidate plasmas (one pooled normal and two pools from anticoagulated patients) were determined in 20 laboratories using six thromboplastin reagents comprising three International Reference Thromboplastins (human, rabbit and bovine), two recombinant human reagents and one placental human reagent. Interlaboratory variability of INR estimation was low with geometric coefficients of variation (gcv) <10% except in one case. Significant differences in mean INR were found between the different thromboplastins with lowest INR values found with the bovine reagent. INR values from the International rabbit and human reagents differed by <6% and were combined to give proposed assigned INR values. Significant differences in INR estimates from four thromboplastins of human origin may indicate that single assigned INR values are not applicable for use with all thromboplastin reagents. Field trials to assess the validity of single assigned INR values in clinical practice are required.

Multicentre evaluation of the Thrombotest International Sensitivity Index used with a steel ball coagulometer

AIM

To compare the International Sensitivity Index (ISI) of the Thrombotest reagent used with a steel ball coagulometer (KC) to the ISI of the same reagent used with the manual (tilt tube) technique.

METHODS

The study was carried out by eight laboratories using their own KC instrument and method of testing. All laboratories used the same batch of Thrombotest to determine the clotting times of fresh blood samples from 20 local healthy volunteers and 60 patients on long term oral anticoagulant therapy. KC clotting times were plotted against manual clotting times on double logarithmic scales. Orthogonal regression lines were calculated to assess the ISI.

RESULTS

In two laboratories the ISI of the KC method was lower than that of the manual method; these differences, however, were 2% or less. In the other laboratories no clinically important differences were observed between ISI values obtained. However, the clotting times determined with the KC methods were shorter than the manual values.

CONCLUSIONS

The ISI of Thrombotest determined with the KC methods was very similar to the manual value. Therefore, use of the ISI value supplied by the manufacturer without adjustment is justified. The mean normal prothrombin time, however, must be determined locally.