Warfarin monitoring in nursing homes assessed by case histories. Do recommendations and electronic alerts affect judgements?

PURPOSE: Older adults treated with warfarin are prone to complications, and high-quality monitoring is essential. The aim of this case history based study was to assess the quality of warfarin monitoring in a routine situation, and in a situation with an antibiotic-warfarin interaction, before and after receiving an electronic alert. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In April 2014, a national web-based survey with two case histories was distributed among Norwegian nursing home physicians and general practitioners working part-time in nursing homes. Case A represented a patient on stable warfarin treatment, but with a substantial INR increase within the therapeutic interval. Case B represented a more challenging patient with trimethoprim sulfamethoxazole (TMS) treatment due to pyelonephritis. In both cases, the physicians were asked to state the next warfarin dose and the INR recall interval. In case B, the physicians could change their suggestions after receiving an electronic alert on the TMS-warfarin interaction. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety eight physicians in 292 nursing homes responded. Suggested INR recall intervals and warfarin doses varied substantially in both cases. In case A, 61% gave acceptable answers according to published recommendations, while only 9% did so for case B. Regarding the TMS-warfarin interaction in case history B, the electronic alert increased the percentage of respondents correctly suggesting a dose reduction from 29% to 53%. Having an INR instrument in the nursing home was associated with shortened INR recall times. CONCLUSIONS: Practical advice on handling of warfarin treatment and drug interactions is needed. Electronic alerts as presented in electronic medical records seem insufficient to change practice. Availability of INR instruments may be important regarding recall time.

The microINR portable coagulometer: analytical quality and user-friendliness of a PT (INR) point-of-care instrument.

Regular measurement of prothrombin time as an international normalized ratio PT (INR) is mandatory for optimal and safe use of warfarin. Scandinavian evaluation of laboratory equipment for primary health care (SKUP) evaluated the microINR portable coagulometer (microINR®) (iLine Microsystems S.L., Spain) for measurement of PT (INR). Analytical quality and user-friendliness were evaluated under optimal conditions at an accredited hospital laboratory and at two primary health care centres (PHCCs). Patients were recruited at the outpatient clinic of the Laboratory of Medical Biochemistry, St Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway (n = 98) and from two PHCCs (n = 88). Venous blood samples were analyzed under optimal conditions on the STA-R®Evolution with STA-SPA + reagent (Stago, France) (Owren method), and the results were compared to capillary measurements on the microINR®. The imprecision of the microINR® was 6% (90% CI: 5.3-7.0%) and 6.3% (90% CI: 5.1-8.3) in the outpatient clinic and PHCC2, respectively for INR ≥2.5. The microINR® did not meet the SKUP quality requirement for imprecision ≤5.0%. For INR <2.5 at PHCC2 and at both levels in PHCC1, CV% was ≤5.0. The accuracy fulfilled the SKUP quality goal in both outpatient clinic and PHCCs. User-friendliness of the operation manual was rated as intermediate, defined by SKUP as neutral ratings assessed as neither good nor bad. Operation facilities was rated unsatisfactory, and time factors satisfactory. In conclusion, quality requirements for imprecision were not met. The SKUP criteria for accuracy was fulfilled both at the hospital and at the PHCCs. The user-friendliness was rated intermediate.