↓ Skip to main content

Bleeding events and associated factors in a cohort of adult patients taking warfarin in Sarawak, Malaysia

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Bleeding events and associated factors in a cohort of adult patients taking warfarin in Sarawak, Malaysia
Published in
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11239-013-1017-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frances Edwards, Paul Arkell, Alan Yean Yip Fong, Lesley M. Roberts, David Gendy, Christina Siew-Hie Wong, Joanna Chee Yien Ngu, Lee Len Tiong, Faridha Mohd Salleh Bibi, Lana Yin Hui Lai, Tiong Kiam Ong, Michael Abouyannis

Abstract

Evidence is emerging that rates of adverse events in patients taking warfarin may vary with ethnicity. This study investigated the rates of bleeds and thromboembolic events, the international normalised ratio (INR) status and the relationship between INR and bleeding events in Malaysia. Patients attending INR clinic at the Heart Centre, Sarawak General Hospital were enrolled on an ad hoc basis from May 2010 and followed up for 1 year. At each routine visit, INR was recorded and screening for bleeding or thromboembolism occurred. Variables relating to INR control were used as predictors of bleeds in logistic regression models. 125 patients contributed to 140 person-years of follow-up. The rates of major bleed, thromboembolic event and minor bleed per 100 person-years of follow-up were 1.4, 0.75 and 34.3. The median time at target range calculated using the Rosendaal method was 61.6 % (IQR 44.6-74.1 %). Of the out-of-range readings, 30.0 % were below range and 15.4 % were above. INR variability, (standard deviation of individuals' mean INR), was the best predictor of bleeding events, with an odds ratio of 3.21 (95 % CI 1.10-9.38). Low rates of both major bleeds and thromboembolic events were recorded, in addition to a substantial number of INR readings under the recommended target range. This may suggest that the recommended INR ranges may not represent the optimal warfarin intensity for this population and that a lower intensity of therapy, as observed in this cohort, could be beneficial in preventing adverse events.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 28%
Researcher 3 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Lecturer 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2013.
All research outputs
#20,210,424
of 22,731,677 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#848
of 963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,126
of 211,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#14
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,731,677 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 963 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 211,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.