Data documenting the performance of the PT/INR line correction method for reconciling INR discrepancies between central laboratory coagulation analyzers using different thromboplastins during the evaluation of a portable Coagulometer

Wendy S. Baker, Kathleen J. Albright, Heidi Spratt, Megan Berman, Peggy A. Mann, Jaime Unabia, John R. Petersen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The data presented here was produced as part of an evaluation of the performance of the CoaguChek XS point-of-care coagulation analyzer, which is discussed in the research article “POCT PT INR – Is it adequate for Patient Care? A Comparison of the Roche Coaguchek XS vs. Stago Star vs. Siemens BCS in Patients Routinely Seen in an Anticoagulation Clinic” (Baker et al., in press) [1]. An effort to reconcile discrepancies in the patient INR result distributions from different central lab instruments (Stago Star and Siemens BCS) with the PT/INR line method is described (Poller et al., 2010, 2011; Ibrahim et al., 2011) [2-4]. While regression analysis of the ECAA Poller calibrant data provided a linear PT/INR line for all methods, Pearson's chi-squared and one-way repeated measures ANOVA analyses showed that central lab INR measurements continued to exhibit measurement site dependence after the PT/INR line correction was applied. According to paired t-test analysis, only the human thromboplastin dependent methods (CoaguChek XS and Siemens BCS both before and after PT/INR line correction) showed statistically significant agreement (p-value >0.05).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)312-320
Number of pages9
JournalData in Brief
Volume16
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2018

Fingerprint

International Normalized Ratio
Thromboplastin
Point-of-Care Systems
Patient Care
Analysis of Variance
Regression Analysis
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General

Cite this

Data documenting the performance of the PT/INR line correction method for reconciling INR discrepancies between central laboratory coagulation analyzers using different thromboplastins during the evaluation of a portable Coagulometer. / Baker, Wendy S.; Albright, Kathleen J.; Spratt, Heidi; Berman, Megan; Mann, Peggy A.; Unabia, Jaime; Petersen, John R.

In: Data in Brief, Vol. 16, 01.02.2018, p. 312-320.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5e4408c26ecf464191e2dc99e9fa3da2,
title = "Data documenting the performance of the PT/INR line correction method for reconciling INR discrepancies between central laboratory coagulation analyzers using different thromboplastins during the evaluation of a portable Coagulometer",
abstract = "The data presented here was produced as part of an evaluation of the performance of the CoaguChek XS point-of-care coagulation analyzer, which is discussed in the research article “POCT PT INR – Is it adequate for Patient Care? A Comparison of the Roche Coaguchek XS vs. Stago Star vs. Siemens BCS in Patients Routinely Seen in an Anticoagulation Clinic” (Baker et al., in press) [1]. An effort to reconcile discrepancies in the patient INR result distributions from different central lab instruments (Stago Star and Siemens BCS) with the PT/INR line method is described (Poller et al., 2010, 2011; Ibrahim et al., 2011) [2-4]. While regression analysis of the ECAA Poller calibrant data provided a linear PT/INR line for all methods, Pearson's chi-squared and one-way repeated measures ANOVA analyses showed that central lab INR measurements continued to exhibit measurement site dependence after the PT/INR line correction was applied. According to paired t-test analysis, only the human thromboplastin dependent methods (CoaguChek XS and Siemens BCS both before and after PT/INR line correction) showed statistically significant agreement (p-value >0.05).",
author = "Baker, {Wendy S.} and Albright, {Kathleen J.} and Heidi Spratt and Megan Berman and Mann, {Peggy A.} and Jaime Unabia and Petersen, {John R.}",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.dib.2017.11.020",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "312--320",
journal = "Data in Brief",
issn = "2352-3409",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Data documenting the performance of the PT/INR line correction method for reconciling INR discrepancies between central laboratory coagulation analyzers using different thromboplastins during the evaluation of a portable Coagulometer

AU - Baker, Wendy S.

AU - Albright, Kathleen J.

AU - Spratt, Heidi

AU - Berman, Megan

AU - Mann, Peggy A.

AU - Unabia, Jaime

AU - Petersen, John R.

PY - 2018/2/1

Y1 - 2018/2/1

N2 - The data presented here was produced as part of an evaluation of the performance of the CoaguChek XS point-of-care coagulation analyzer, which is discussed in the research article “POCT PT INR – Is it adequate for Patient Care? A Comparison of the Roche Coaguchek XS vs. Stago Star vs. Siemens BCS in Patients Routinely Seen in an Anticoagulation Clinic” (Baker et al., in press) [1]. An effort to reconcile discrepancies in the patient INR result distributions from different central lab instruments (Stago Star and Siemens BCS) with the PT/INR line method is described (Poller et al., 2010, 2011; Ibrahim et al., 2011) [2-4]. While regression analysis of the ECAA Poller calibrant data provided a linear PT/INR line for all methods, Pearson's chi-squared and one-way repeated measures ANOVA analyses showed that central lab INR measurements continued to exhibit measurement site dependence after the PT/INR line correction was applied. According to paired t-test analysis, only the human thromboplastin dependent methods (CoaguChek XS and Siemens BCS both before and after PT/INR line correction) showed statistically significant agreement (p-value >0.05).

AB - The data presented here was produced as part of an evaluation of the performance of the CoaguChek XS point-of-care coagulation analyzer, which is discussed in the research article “POCT PT INR – Is it adequate for Patient Care? A Comparison of the Roche Coaguchek XS vs. Stago Star vs. Siemens BCS in Patients Routinely Seen in an Anticoagulation Clinic” (Baker et al., in press) [1]. An effort to reconcile discrepancies in the patient INR result distributions from different central lab instruments (Stago Star and Siemens BCS) with the PT/INR line method is described (Poller et al., 2010, 2011; Ibrahim et al., 2011) [2-4]. While regression analysis of the ECAA Poller calibrant data provided a linear PT/INR line for all methods, Pearson's chi-squared and one-way repeated measures ANOVA analyses showed that central lab INR measurements continued to exhibit measurement site dependence after the PT/INR line correction was applied. According to paired t-test analysis, only the human thromboplastin dependent methods (CoaguChek XS and Siemens BCS both before and after PT/INR line correction) showed statistically significant agreement (p-value >0.05).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85035012756&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85035012756&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.dib.2017.11.020

DO - 10.1016/j.dib.2017.11.020

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 312

EP - 320

JO - Data in Brief

JF - Data in Brief

SN - 2352-3409

ER -