312 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18814903)
1. Point-of-care (POCT) prothrombin time monitors: is a periodical control of their performance useful?
Barcellona D; Fenu L; Cornacchini S; Marongiu F
Thromb Res; 2009 Mar; 123(5):775-9. PubMed ID: 18814903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Quality assurance program for whole blood prothrombin time-international normalized ratio point-of-care monitors used for patient self-testing to control oral anticoagulation.
Tripodi A; Bressi C; Carpenedo M; Chantarangkul V; Clerici M; Mannucci PM
Thromb Res; 2004; 113(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 15081563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A national field study of quality assessment of CoaguChek point-of-care testing prothrombin time monitors.
Meijer P; Kluft C; Poller L; van der Meer FJ; Keown M; Ibrahim S; van den Besselaar AM; Tripodi A; Jespersen J
Am J Clin Pathol; 2006 Nov; 126(5):756-61. PubMed ID: 17050073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The reliability of point-of-care prothrombin time testing. A comparison of CoaguChek S and XS INR measurements with hospital laboratory monitoring.
Ryan F; O'Shea S; Byrne S
Int J Lab Hematol; 2010 Feb; 32(1 Pt 1):e26-33. PubMed ID: 19032373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Interference of lupus anticoagulants in prothrombin time assays: implications for selection of adequate methods to optimize the management of thrombosis in the antiphospholipid-antibody syndrome.
Della Valle P; Crippa L; Garlando AM; Pattarini E; Safa O; Viganò D'Angelo S; D'Angelo A
Haematologica; 1999 Dec; 84(12):1065-74. PubMed ID: 10586206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Clinical impact of point-of-care vs laboratory measurement of anticoagulation.
Sunderji R; Gin K; Shalansky K; Carter C; Chambers K; Davies C; Schwartz L; Fung A
Am J Clin Pathol; 2005 Feb; 123(2):184-8. PubMed ID: 15842040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Results of the performance verification of the CoaguChek XS system.
Plesch W; Wolf T; Breitenbeck N; Dikkeschei LD; Cervero A; Perez PL; van den Besselaar AM
Thromb Res; 2008; 123(2):381-9. PubMed ID: 18585761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. External quality assessment (EQA) for CoaguChek monitors.
Jespersen J; Poller L; van den Besselaar AM; van der Meer FJ; Palareti G; Tripodi A; Shiach C; Keown M; Ibrahim S
Thromb Haemost; 2010 May; 103(5):936-41. PubMed ID: 20216990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of patient capability to self-adjust oral anticoagulant dose: a multicenter study on home use of portable prothrombin time monitor (COAGUCHECK).
Cosmi B; Palareti G; Carpanedo M; Pengo V; Biasiolo A; Rampazzo P; Morstabilini G; Testa S
Haematologica; 2000 Aug; 85(8):826-31. PubMed ID: 10942929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Calibration of local systems with lyophilized calibrant plasmas improves the interlaboratory variability of the INR in the Italian external quality assessment scheme.
Chantarangkul V; Tripodi A; Cesana BM; Mannucci PM
Thromb Haemost; 1999 Dec; 82(6):1621-6. PubMed ID: 10613645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. External quality assessment of prothrombin time: the split-sample model compared with external quality assessment with commercial control material.
Sølvik UØ; Stavelin A; Christensen NG; Sandberg S
Scand J Clin Lab Invest; 2006; 66(4):337-49. PubMed ID: 16777762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. INR comparison between the CoaguChek S and a standard laboratory method among patients with self-management of oral anticoagulation.
Hentrich DP; Fritschi J; Müller PR; Wuillemin WA
Thromb Res; 2007; 119(4):489-95. PubMed ID: 16765423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Discrepant sensitivity of thromboplastin reagents to clotting factor levels explored by the prothrombin time in patients on stable oral anticoagulant treatment: impact on the international normalized ratio system.
Testa S; Morstabilini G; Fattorini A; Galli L; Denti N; D'Angelo A
Haematologica; 2002 Dec; 87(12):1265-73. PubMed ID: 12495900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Accuracy of international normalized ratio determined by portable venous-blood coagulation monitor versus a central laboratory.
Sirithunyanont C; Bhuripanyo K; Kangkagate C; Winyarat W; Srichaya P; Wangtip K
J Med Assoc Thai; 2003 May; 86 Suppl 1():S67-75. PubMed ID: 12866771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Improving the inter-laboratory harmonization of the international normalized ratio (INR): utilizing the concept of transference to estimate and/or validate international sensitivity index (ISI) and mean normal prothrombin time (MNPT) values and/or to eliminate measurement bias.
Favaloro EJ; McVicker W; Zhang Y; Hamdam S; Huynh M; Peris P; O'Neal M; Hocker N
Clin Lab Sci; 2012; 25(1):13-25. PubMed ID: 22458045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Oral anticoagulant monitoring by laboratory or near-patient testing: what a clinician should be aware of.
Tripodi A; Breukink-Engbers WG; van den Besselaar AM
Semin Vasc Med; 2003 Aug; 3(3):243-54. PubMed ID: 15199457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation therapy in children.
Paioni P; Kroiss S; Kägi E; Bergsträsser E; Fasnacht M; Bauersfeld U; Schmugge M; Albisetti M
Acta Haematol; 2009; 122(1):58-63. PubMed ID: 19816011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of laboratory and portable monitor international normalized ratio determinations. Comparison with a criterion standard.
Kaatz SS; White RH; Hill J; Mascha E; Humphries JE; Becker DM
Arch Intern Med; 1995 Sep; 155(17):1861-7. PubMed ID: 7677552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Patient self-testing is a reliable and acceptable alternative to laboratory INR monitoring.
Gardiner C; Williams K; Mackie IJ; Machin SJ; Cohen H
Br J Haematol; 2005 Jan; 128(2):242-7. PubMed ID: 15638860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Point of care monitors for oral anticoagulant therapy.
Nutescu EA
Semin Thromb Hemost; 2004 Dec; 30(6):697-702. PubMed ID: 15630676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
