title: A randomized trial comparing INR monitoring devices in patients with anticoagulation self-management: evaluation of a novel error-grid approach.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In addition to the metrological quality of international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring devices used in patients' self-management of long-term anticoagulation, the effectiveness of self-monitoring with such devices has to be evaluated under real-life conditions with a focus on clinical implications. An approach to evaluate the clinical significance of inaccuracies is the error-grid analysis as already established in self-monitoring of blood glucose. Two anticoagulation monitors were compared in a real-life setting and a novel error-grid instrument for oral anticoagulation has been evaluated.
  
  
  METHODS
  In a randomized crossover study 16 patients performed self-management of anticoagulation using the INRatio and the CoaguChek S system. Main outcome measures were clinically relevant INR differences according to established criteria and to the error-grid approach.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A lower rate of clinically relevant disagreements according to Anderson's criteria was found with CoaguChek S than with INRatio without statistical significance (10.77% vs. 12.90%; P = 0.787). Using the error-grid we found principally consistent results: More measurement pairs with discrepancies of no or low clinical relevance were found with CoaguChek S, whereas with INRatio we found more differences with a moderate clinical relevance. A high rate of patients' satisfaction with both of the point of care devices was found with only marginal differences.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  A principal appropriateness of the investigated point-of-care devices to adequately monitor the INR is shown. The error-grid is useful for comparing monitoring methods with a focus on clinical relevance under real-life conditions beyond assessing the pure metrological quality, but we emphasize that additional trials using this instrument with larger patient populations are needed to detect differences in clinically relevant disagreements.
authors.affiliation: DIeM - Institute for Evidence Based Medicine, Venloer Str. 301-303, 50823 Cologne, Germany. l.hemkens@di-em.de
authors.forename: Lars G
authors.initials: LG
authors.lastname: Hemkens
authors.forename: Kristian M
authors.initials: KM
authors.lastname: Hilden
authors.forename: Stephan
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Hartschen
authors.forename: Thomas
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Kaiser
authors.forename: Ulrike
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Didjurgeit
authors.forename: Roland
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Hansen
authors.forename: Ralf
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Bender
authors.forename: Peter T
authors.initials: PT
authors.lastname: Sawicki
mesh_terms: D000284:Administration, Oral; D000368:Aged; D000925:Anticoagulants / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D001777:Blood Coagulation / Q000187:drug effects*; D018592:Cross-Over Studies; D016903:Drug Monitoring / Q000295:instrumentation*; D004867:Equipment Design; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D019934:International Normalized Ratio / Q000295:instrumentation*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012648:Self Care / Q000295:instrumentation*
chemical_list: D000925:Anticoagulants