At-Home Versus In-Clinic INR Monitoring: A Cost-Utility Analysis from The Home INR Study (THINRS).

dc.contributor.author

Phibbs, Ciaran S

dc.contributor.author

Love, Sean R

dc.contributor.author

Jacobson, Alan K

dc.contributor.author

Edson, Robert

dc.contributor.author

Su, Pon

dc.contributor.author

Uyeda, Lauren

dc.contributor.author

Matchar, David B

dc.contributor.author

writing for the THINRS Executive Committee and Site Investigators

dc.date.accessioned

2021-05-05T07:52:14Z

dc.date.available

2021-05-05T07:52:14Z

dc.date.issued

2016-09

dc.date.updated

2021-05-05T07:52:06Z

dc.description.abstract

Background

Effective management of patients using warfarin is resource-intensive, requiring frequent in-clinic testing of the international normalized ratio (INR). Patient self-testing (PST) using portable at-home INR monitoring devices has emerged as a convenient alternative. As revealed by The Home INR Study (THINRS), event rates for PST were not significantly different from those for in-clinic high-quality anticoagulation management (HQACM), and a cumulative gain in quality of life was observed for patients undergoing PST.

Objective

To perform a cost-utility analysis of weekly PST versus monthly HQACM and to examine the sensitivity of these results to testing frequency.

Patients/interventions

In this study, 2922 patients taking warfarin for atrial fibrillation or mechanical heart valve, and who demonstrated PST competence, were randomized to either weekly PST (n = 1465) or monthly in-clinic testing (n = 1457). In a sub-study, 234 additional patients were randomized to PST once every 4 weeks (n = 116) or PST twice weekly (n = 118). The endpoints were quality of life (measured by the Health Utilities Index), health care utilization, and costs over 2 years of follow-up.

Results

PST and HQACM participants were similar with regard to gender, age, and CHADS2 score. The total cost per patient over 2 years of follow-up was $32,484 for HQACM and $33,460 for weekly PST, representing a difference of $976. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained with PST once weekly was $5566 (95 % CI, -$11,490 to $25,142). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was sensitive to testing frequency: weekly PST dominated PST twice weekly and once every 4 weeks. Compared to HQACM, weekly PST was associated with statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in quality of life. The ICER for weekly PST versus HQACM was well within accepted standards for cost-effectiveness, and was preferred over more or less frequent PST. These results were robust to sensitivity analyses of key assumptions.

Conclusion

Weekly PST is a cost-effective alternative to monthly HQACM and a preferred testing frequency compared to twice weekly or monthly PST.
dc.identifier

10.1007/s11606-016-3700-8

dc.identifier.issn

0884-8734

dc.identifier.issn

1525-1497

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/22816

dc.language

eng

dc.publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

dc.relation.ispartof

Journal of general internal medicine

dc.relation.isversionof

10.1007/s11606-016-3700-8

dc.subject

writing for the THINRS Executive Committee and Site Investigators

dc.subject

Humans

dc.subject

Warfarin

dc.subject

Anticoagulants

dc.subject

Drug Monitoring

dc.subject

International Normalized Ratio

dc.subject

Self Care

dc.subject

Follow-Up Studies

dc.subject

Prospective Studies

dc.subject

Adult

dc.subject

Aged

dc.subject

Aged, 80 and over

dc.subject

Middle Aged

dc.subject

Ambulatory Care Facilities

dc.subject

Hospitals, Veterans

dc.subject

Home Care Services

dc.subject

Cost-Benefit Analysis

dc.subject

Female

dc.subject

Male

dc.subject

Young Adult

dc.title

At-Home Versus In-Clinic INR Monitoring: A Cost-Utility Analysis from The Home INR Study (THINRS).

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Matchar, David B|0000-0003-3020-2108

pubs.begin-page

1061

pubs.end-page

1067

pubs.issue

9

pubs.organisational-group

School of Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Duke Clinical Research Institute

pubs.organisational-group

Duke Global Health Institute

pubs.organisational-group

Pathology

pubs.organisational-group

Medicine, General Internal Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

Institutes and Centers

pubs.organisational-group

University Institutes and Centers

pubs.organisational-group

Institutes and Provost's Academic Units

pubs.organisational-group

Clinical Science Departments

pubs.organisational-group

Medicine

pubs.publication-status

Published

pubs.volume

31

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
At-Home Versus In-Clinic INR Monitoring A Cost–Utility Analysis from The Home INR Study (THINRS).pdf
Size:
647.51 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format