You are here:HomeFor CliniciansPublished ResearchSelf Monitoring Meta-Analysis
For Patients
What is PT/INR Self Testing?
How Self Testing Works
Benefits of Self Testing
Is Self Testing for You?
INR Meters
What People Say
Medications & Diet
Frequently Asked Questions
Get Started Now
For Clinicians
Improving Outcomes
How Self Testing Works
Which Patients Qualify
What Doctors Say
About the Meters
Frequently Asked Questions
Prescription - Rx
Clinician Info Kit
Published Research
Effect on Clinical Outcomes
Reduced Hospitalizations
The Home INR Study
Self Monitoring Meta-Analysis
Time in Therapeutic Range (TTR)
Heart Valve Replacement
Lowered Risk
Practical Implementation

About Us

Self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The Lancet

Volume 367, Issue 9508, Pages 404 - 411, 4 February 2006

Dr C Heneghan MRCGP, P Alonso-Coello MD, JM Garcia-Alamino RN, R Perera PhD, E Meats BSc, Prof P Glasziou FRACGP



Near-patient testing has made self-monitoring of anticoagulation with warfarin feasible, and several trials have suggested that such monitoring might be equal to or better than standard monitoring. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomised controlled trials that assessed the effects of self-monitoring or self-management (self-testing and self-dosage) of anticoagulation compared with standard monitoring.



We identified 14 randomized trials of self-monitoring: pooled estimates showed significant reductions in thromboembolic events and major hemorrhage. Trials of combined self-monitoring and self-adjusted therapy showed significant reductions in thromboembolic events and death.



Self-management improves the quality of oral anticoagulation. Patients capable of self-monitoring have fewer thromboembolic events and lower mortality than those who self-monitor alone. However, self-monitoring is not feasible for all patients, and requires identification and education of suitable candidates.





<< Previous StudyNext Study >>