Point-of-care test (POCT) INR: hope or illusion?

In the last decade, point-of-care tests were developed to provide rapid generation of test results. These tests have increasingly broad applications. In the area of hemostasis, the international normalized ratio, INR point-of-care test (POCT INR), is the main test of this new proposal. This test has great potential benefit in situations where the quick INR results influences clinical decision making, as in acute ischemic stroke, before surgical procedures and during cardiac surgery. The INR POCT has the potential to be used for self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation in patients under anticoagulant therapy. However, the precision and accuracy of INR POCT still need to be enhanced to increase effectiveness and efficiency of the test. Additionally, the RDC / ANVISA Number 302 makes clear that the POCT testing must be supervised by the technical manager of the Clinical Laboratory in the pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical. In practice, the Clinical Laboratory does not participate in the implementation of POCT testing or release of the results. Clinicians have high expectation with the incorporation of INR POCT in clinical practice, despite the limitations of this method. These professionals are willing to train the patient to perform the test, but are not legally responsible for the quality of it and are not prepared for the maintenance of equipment. The definition of who is in charge for the test must be one to ensure the quality control.

[1]  R. R. Andrade,et al.  Oral anticoagulation in carriers of mechanical heart valve prostheses: experience of ten years. , 2010, Revista brasileira de cirurgia cardiovascular : orgao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular.

[2]  D. Fitzmaurice,et al.  Point‐of‐care testing in haemostasis , 2010, British journal of haematology.

[3]  P. Park,et al.  Accuracy of CoaguChek XS for point-of-care antithrombotic monitoring in children with heart disease. , 2010, Annals of clinical and laboratory science.

[4]  S. Byrne,et al.  The reliability of point‐of‐care prothrombin time testing. A comparison of CoaguChek S® and XS® INR measurements with hospital laboratory monitoring , 2010, International journal of laboratory hematology.

[5]  W. Hacke,et al.  Point-of-Care International Normalized Ratio Testing Accelerates Thrombolysis in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Using Oral Anticoagulants , 2009, Stroke.

[6]  M. Katz Long-Term Anticoagulation , 2009 .

[7]  E. M. Cott Point-of-care testing in coagulation. , 2009 .

[8]  L. F. Moreira,et al.  Warfarin prevents venous obstruction after cardiac devices implantation in high-risk patients: partial analysis. , 2008, Revista brasileira de cirurgia cardiovascular : orgao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular.

[9]  K. Hyde,et al.  Guidelines for point‐of‐care testing: haematology , 2008, British journal of haematology.

[10]  S. Pauker,et al.  Valvular and structural heart disease: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). , 2008, Chest.

[11]  Mark Crowther,et al.  Pharmacology and management of the vitamin K antagonists: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). , 2008, Chest.

[12]  N. G. Christensen,et al.  External quality assessment of prothrombin time: The split‐sample model compared with external quality assessment with commercial control material , 2006, Scandinavian journal of clinical and laboratory investigation.

[13]  G. Samsa,et al.  Point-of-care testing of the international normalized ratio in patients with antiphospholipid antibodies , 2004, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[14]  R. Chaudhry,et al.  Importance of device evaluation for point-of-care prothrombin time international normalized ratio testing programs. , 2005, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[15]  E. Murray,et al.  Point of care testing for INR monitoring: where are we now? , 2004, British journal of haematology.

[16]  Scott Hamilton,et al.  Association of outcome with early stroke treatment: pooled analysis of ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA stroke trials , 2004, The Lancet.

[17]  C. Samama,et al.  Near‐patient testing of haemostasis in the operating theatre: an approach to appropriate use of blood in surgery , 2003, Vox sanguinis.

[18]  Valentin Fuster,et al.  American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Foundation guide to warfarin therapy. , 2003, Circulation.

[19]  Valentin Fuster,et al.  American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Foundation guide to warfarin therapy. , 2003, Circulation.

[20]  J. Connor,et al.  Differences in Warfarin Dosing Decisions Based on International Normalized Ratio Measurements with Two Point‐of‐Care Testing Devices and a Reference Laboratory Measurement , 2002, Pharmacotherapy.

[21]  J. T. Owings,et al.  A Comparison of Point-of-Care Instruments Designed for Monitoring Oral Anticoagulation with Standard Laboratory Methods , 2000, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[22]  D. Fitzmaurice,et al.  Is the international normalised ratio (INR) reliable? A trial of comparative measurements in hospital laboratory and primary care settings. , 1999, Journal of clinical pathology.

[23]  M G Amato,et al.  Comparison of an anticoagulation clinic with usual medical care: anticoagulation control, patient outcomes, and health care costs. , 1998, Archives of internal medicine.

[24]  F. Rosendaal The Scylla and Charybdis of oral anticoagulant treatment. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  H. Thijssen,et al.  Vitamin K metabolism and vitamin K1 status in human liver samples: a search for inter‐individual differences in warfarin sensitivity , 1993, British journal of haematology.

[26]  B. Stults,et al.  Long-term anticoagulation. Indications and management. , 1989, The Western journal of medicine.