↓ Skip to main content

Point-of-care testing for emergency assessment of coagulation in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
46 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Point-of-care testing for emergency assessment of coagulation in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants
Published in
Critical Care, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1619-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthias Ebner, Ingvild Birschmann, Andreas Peter, Charlotte Spencer, Florian Härtig, Joachim Kuhn, Gunnar Blumenstock, Christine S. Zuern, Ulf Ziemann, Sven Poli, Matthias Ebner, Ingvild Birschmann, Andreas Peter, Charlotte Spencer, Florian Härtig, Joachim Kuhn, Gunnar Blumenstock, Christine S. Zuern, Ulf Ziemann, Sven Poli

Abstract

Point-of-care testing (POCT) of coagulation has been proven to be of great value in accelerating emergency treatment. Specific POCT for direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is not available, but the effects of DOAC on established POCT have been described. We aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of Hemochron® Signature coagulation POCT to qualitatively rule out relevant concentrations of apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran in real-life patients. We enrolled 68 patients receiving apixaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran and obtained blood samples at six pre-specified time points. Coagulation testing was performed using prothrombin time/international normalized ratio (PT/INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), and activated clotting time (ACT+ and ACT-low range) POCT cards. For comparison, laboratory-based assays of diluted thrombin time (Hemoclot) and anti-Xa activity were conducted. DOAC concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Four hundred and three samples were collected. POCT results of PT/INR and ACT+ correlated with both rivaroxaban and dabigatran concentrations. Insufficient correlation was found for apixaban. Rivaroxaban concentrations at <30 and <100 ng/mL were detected with >95% specificity at PT/INR POCT ≤1.0 and ≤1.1 and ACT+ POCT ≤120 and ≤130 s. Dabigatran concentrations at <30 and <50 ng/mL were detected with >95% specificity at PT/INR POCT ≤1.1 and ≤1.2 and ACT+ POCT ≤100 s. Hemochron® Signature POCT can be a fast and reliable alternative for guiding emergency treatment during rivaroxaban and dabigatran therapy. It allows the rapid identification of a relevant fraction of patients that can be treated immediately without the need to await the results of much slower laboratory-based coagulation tests. Unique identifier, NCT02371070 . Retrospectively registered on 18 February 2015.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 16%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 14 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 21 March 2017.
All research outputs
#742,146
of 15,083,385 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#718
of 4,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,156
of 402,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#15
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,083,385 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 402,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.