Abstract
Warfarin 2.0 is a computer program that helps physicians optimize treatment of outpatients with warfarin. The main reason for its development was to achieve a good anticoagulation level, avoiding both undertreatment--which causes thromboembolic complications--and overtreatment--which causes hemorrhagic complications. The program was also designed to help educate the anticoagulated patient, standardize warfarin management and audit results of what had been done. The philosophy of continuous quality improvement was applied. Warfarin 2.0 is in clinical operation in the University Hospital, Montevideo, Uruguay, and it has also been used since the end of 1993 in the Favaloro Foundation, Dept. of Hematology, Buenos Aires, Argentina. The results from the first 15 months of use in Montevideo showed an increase in the number of patients being followed (from 91 to 132) and the average number of visits per patient (from one visit every 10.6 weeks to one every 6.5 weeks): The frequency of visits has been in the internationally accepted ranges since the program was implemented. Better anticoagulation levels were achieved after an adjusting period. Unfortunately, the number of undertreated patients is still large, and a thorough analysis of the data is going to be undertaken to continue improving warfarin management.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Bussey H. I., Force R. W., Bianco T. M., Leonard A. D. Reliance on prothrombin time ratios causes significant errors in anticoagulation therapy. Arch Intern Med. 1992 Feb;152(2):278–282. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Echt D. S., Liebson P. R., Mitchell L. B., Peters R. W., Obias-Manno D., Barker A. H., Arensberg D., Baker A., Friedman L., Greene H. L. Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial. N Engl J Med. 1991 Mar 21;324(12):781–788. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199103213241201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Farrow L., Mungall D., Raskob G., Hull R. Predicting the daily prothrombin time response to warfarin. Ther Drug Monit. 1990 May;12(3):246–249. doi: 10.1097/00007691-199005000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hirsh J. Is the dose of warfarin prescribed by American physicians unnecessarily high? Arch Intern Med. 1987 Apr;147(4):769–771. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hunt B. Development of a MUMPS-based anticoagulant management system. Br J Biomed Sci. 1993 Jun;50(2):117–124. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laffel G., Blumenthal D. The case for using industrial quality management science in health care organizations. JAMA. 1989 Nov 24;262(20):2869–2873. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Poller L., Wright D., Rowlands M. Prospective comparative study of computer programs used for management of warfarin. J Clin Pathol. 1993 Apr;46(4):299–303. doi: 10.1136/jcp.46.4.299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rosendaal F. R., Cannegieter S. C., van der Meer F. J., Briët E. A method to determine the optimal intensity of oral anticoagulant therapy. Thromb Haemost. 1993 Mar 1;69(3):236–239. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ryan P. J., Gilbert M., Rose P. E. Computer control of anticoagulant dose for therapeutic management. BMJ. 1989 Nov 11;299(6709):1207–1209. doi: 10.1136/bmj.299.6709.1207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Singer D. E. Randomized trials of warfarin for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 1992 Nov 12;327(20):1451–1453. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199211123272009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- White R. H., Mungall D. Outpatient management of warfarin therapy: comparison of computer-predicted dosage adjustment to skilled professional care. Ther Drug Monit. 1991 Jan;13(1):46–50. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]