Performance evaluation of the new CoaguChek XS system compared with the established CoaguChek system by patients experienced in INR-self management

Summary

The aim of the study was to analyze the concordance of INR values obtained by educated lay users with those obtained by professionals and to determine the imprecision of the new system. The new CoaguChek^® XS system was tested in a user study over six weeks at four study centres in Austria, Denmark and Germany. Seventy-five patients receiving oral anticoagulant therapy were enrolled in the study. The INR results in capillary whole blood taken by professionals and by patients using the Coagu- Chek XS system were similar, and the mean relative bias was < 1%. The imprecision of the CoaguChek XS system calculated from duplicate testing is low (<6%) and slightly better than for the established CoaguChek S system. The INR results measured during the home testing phase correlated quite well between the established CoaguChek S system and the new CoaguChek XS system with a mean bias of 0.14 INR. This is a remarkably low bias taking into consideration that more than 30 different test strip lots were applied. A questionnaire was filled out by all patients to assess their personal impression. It revealed that patients were very satisfied with the new system and found it easy to operate. The results demonstrate that the agreement between professional and patient INR results for the new Coagu- Chek XS system was excellent and that INR values can be determined by lay users as well as by professionals. The instrument is very well accepted by the patients and their satisfaction even increased after four weeks practice at home.

Keywords

Patients education - clinical trials - oral anticoagulants - home monitoring - INR-self management

• References

• 1 van den Besselaar AM, Breddin K, Lutze G. et al. Multicenter evaluation of a new capillary blood prothrombin time monitoring system. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 1995; 6: 726-732.
• 2 Hasenkam JM, Kimose HH, Knudsen L. et al. Self management of oral anticoagulant therapy after heart valve replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1997; 11: 935-942.
• 3 Bernardo A. Optimizing long-term anticoagulation by patient self-management?. Z Kardiol 1998; 87 (Suppl. 04) 75-81.
• 4 Jackson SL, Bereznicki LR, Peterson GM. et al. Accuracy and clinical usefulness of the near-patient testing CoaguChek S international normalised ratio monitor in rural medical practice. Austral J Rural Health 2004; 12: 137-142.
• 5 Watzke HH, Forberg E, Svolba G. et al. A prospective controlled trial comparing weekly self-testing and self-dosing with the standard management of patients on stable oral anticoagulation. Thromb Haemost 2000; 83: 661-665.
• 6 Heidinger KS, Bernardo A, Taborski U. et al. Clinical outcome of self-management of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation or deep vein thrombosis. Thromb Res 2000; 98: 287-293.
• 7 Koertke H, Minami K, Boethig D. et al. INR selfmanagement permits lower anticoagulation levels after mechanical heart valve replacement. Circulation 2003; 108 (Suppl. 01) II75-II8.
• 8 Siebenhofer A, Berghold A, Sawicki PT. Systematic review of studies of self-management of oral anticoagulation. Thromb Haemost 2004; 91: 225-232.
• 9 Heneghan C, Alonso-Coello P, Garcia-Alamino J. et al. Self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2006; 367: 404-411.
• 10 Passing H, Bablok W. A new biometrical procedure for testing the equality of measurements from two different analytical methods. Application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in clinical chemistry, Part I. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1983; 21: 709-720.
• 11 Bland MJ, Altman D. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 327: 307-310.
• 12 Ansell J, Jacobson A, Levy J. et al International Self-Monitoring Association for Oral. A Guidelines for implementation of patient self-testing and patient selfmanagement of oral anticoagulation. International consensus guidelines prepared by International Self-Monitoring Association for Oral Anticoagulation. Int J Cardiol 2005; 99: 37-45.
• 13 Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M. et al. Short-term venous stasis influences routine coagulation testing. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2005; 16: 453-458.
• 14 Khoschnewis S, Hannes FM, Tschopp M. et al. INR comparison between the CoaguChek Pro PT(N) and a standard laboratory method. Thromb Res 2004; 113: 327-332.
• 15 Boehlen F, Reber G, de Moerloose P. Agreement of a new whole-blood PT/INR test using capillary samples with plasma INR determinations. Thromb Res 2005; 115: 131-134.
• 16 Kitchen S, Jennings I, Woods TA. et al. Two recombinant tissue factor reagents compared to conventional thromboplastins for determination of international normalised ratio: a thirty-three-laboratory collaborative study. The Steering Committee of the UK National External Quality Assessment Scheme for Blood Coagulation. Thromb Haemost 1996; 76: 372-376.
• 17 Bader R, Mannucci PM, Tripodi A. et al. Multicentric evaluation of a new PT reagent based on recombinant human tissue factor and synthetic phospholipids. Thromb Haemost 1994; 71: 292-299.
• 18 Horsti J, Uppa H, Vilpo JA. Poor Agreement among Prothrombin Time International Normalized Ratio Methods: Comparison of Seven Commercial Reagents. Clin Chem 2005; 51: 553-560.
• 19 McBane RD 2 nd, Felty CL, Hartgers ML. et al. Importance of device evaluation for point-of-care prothrombin time international normalized ratio testing programs. Mayo Clinic Proc 2005; 80: 181-186.
• 20 Kjeldsen J, Lassen JF, Petersen PH. et al. Biological variation of International Normalized Ratio for prothrombin times, and consequences in monitoring oral anticoagulant therapy: computer simulation of serial measurements with goal-setting for analytical quality. Clin Chem 1997; 43: 2175-2182.
• 21 van den Besselaar AMHP. Accuracy, Precision, and Quality Control for Point-of-Care Testing of Oral Anticoagulation. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2001; 12: 35-40.
• 22 Hill J. Determination of INR Accuracy: Methods of Analysis. Haemostasis 1996; 26 (Suppl. 03) 422.