Search
Article

Patient INR self-testing

The benefits of patient self-testing

Patient self-testing gives your patients the freedom to test their INR from anywhere and at anytime with immediate results that are comparable to those from the laboratory.1,2 This allows your patients to know their INR value within about one minute from administering their self-test, and the possibilty to discuss the adjustment of their dose directly with you. 

Best practice guidelines recommend patient self-management over outpatient INR monitoring for stable patients on long-term VKA therapy who show motivation and competency in self-care strategies.3-5

CoaguChek® systems offer a holistic solution that can help you improve patient care, improve workflow and reduce healthcare costs.

Systems for patients

Contact Us
Care and satisfaction

Improve patient care and satisfaction

Patients who self-test and manage their own INR spend more time in their therapeutic range7-9 and have fewer very high or low INR values10 compared with VKA patients who are tested in the laboratory or anticoagulation clinic.

This is associated with:

  • Fewer thromboembolic events with no increase in the risk of major bleeding7,11,12
  • Lower mortality risk7,13,14
  • Better treatment satisfaction15-17
  • Improved patient quality of life8,16,17
Engagement and motivation

Engage your patients and improve adherence

  • Patients with long-term medication needs for chronic conditions are more likely to adhere to their therapy when engaged in their own care19-22
  • They may also have improved health outcomes and care experiences compared with those who are not engaged23,24
  • Self-management engages and motivates patients to become actively involved in their own healthcare25
Reduce healthcare costs

Reduce healthcare costs

  • When achieving an average time in therapeutic range (TTR) of 78%, patient self-management (PSM) in VKA patients can reduce treatment cost per patient compared to direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) treatment options 26
  • Patient self management (PSM) can reduce healthcare costs over time compared with usual care and care in the anticoagulation clinic27-29
  • Cost savings with PSM are achieved by increasing the time spent in the therapeutic range, thereby reducing the number of treatment complications27,30

Testimonials

Elena's Story
Elena's Story

"It's convenient, and I carry it around in my purse wherever I go, and do my chacks in a matter of seconds."

Jacob's Story
Jacob's Story

"I got a lot more time on my hands now that I'm not caught up in doctor’s appointments."

...
    ...

    You might be interested in

    ...
      ...

      References 

      1. Plesch et al. (2009). Int J Lab Hematol 31,20–25
      2. Ryan et al. (2010). Int J Lab Hematol 32, e26–33
      3. Holbrook et al (2012). Chest 141, e152S–e184s
      4. Jennings et al (2014). Br J Haematol 167, 600–607
      5. CADTH Optimal Use Report, No. 3.1C. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2014 Jul
      6. Christensen H et al. (2011). Telemed J E-Health 17, 169–176.
      7. Heneghan et al. (2016). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 7, CD003839
      8. Soliman Hamad et al. (2009). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 35, 265–269
      9. Siebenhofer et al. (2007). Thromb Haemost 97, 408–416
      10. Dignan et al. (2013). Int J Cardiol 168, 5378–5384
      11. Heneghan et al. (2012). Lancet 379, 322–334
      12. Sharma et al. (2015). Health Technol Assess 19, 1–172
      13. Garcia-Alamino et al. (2010). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4, CD003839
      14. Christensen et al. (2016). Ann Thorac Surg 101, 1494–1499
      15. Siebenhofer et al. (2012). Thromb Res 130, e60–e66
      16. Tamayo Aguirre et al. (2016). BMC Cardiovasc Disord 16, 180
      17. Verret et al. (2012). Pharmacotherapy 32, 871–879
      18. Matcher et al. (2010). New Engl J Med 363, 1608-1620
      19. Kirchhof et al. (2016). Europace 18, 37–50
      20. Kirchhof et al. (2016). Eur Heart J 37, 2893-2962
      21. Peterson et al. (2014). J Am Coll Cardiol 64, 2133–2145
      22. Kääriäinen et al. (2013). J Clin Nurs 22, 89–96
      23. Greene et al. (2015). Health Aff 34, 431–437
      24. Hibbard et al. (2015). Med Care Res Rev 72, 324–337
      25. Burgwinkle et al. (2008). Managed Care 17, 1–8
      26. Diel et al. (2019). JHEOR 6,142-159
      27. Sharma et al. (2015). BMJ Open 5, e007758
      28. Gerkens et al. (2012). J Thromb Thrombolysis 34, 300–309
      29. Medical Advisory Secretariat (2009). Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series 9:12. Available at www.hqontario.ca/english/providers/program/mas/tech/reviews/pdf/rev_poc_20090928.pdf [Accessed: May 2023]
      30. Bloomfield et al. (2011). Ann Intern Med 154, 472–482