Annals of Pharmacotherapy, Ahead of Print.
BackgroundAccurate monitoring of intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) is essential to mitigate the risk of adverse drug events associated with dosing errors. Although recent data support anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) monitoring preferentially over activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) to improve time to therapeutic anticoagulation, the utility of incorporating anti-Xa monitoring with a calculation-free weight-based UFH nomogram has not been formally evaluated.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to evaluate the time to therapeutic anticoagulation of a calculation-free weight-based UFH nomogram integrated with anti-Xa monitoring versus a historical control of aPTT monitoring utilizing manual dose calculations.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of patients with anti-Xa monitoring and a novel calculation-free weight-based UFH nomogram compared with a historical control with aPTT monitoring and manual calculations.ResultsA total of 103 patients in the aPTT cohort and 100 patients in the anti-Xa cohort were analyzed. The anti-Xa cohort achieved goal therapeutic target 3.8 hours sooner than the aPTT cohort (P = 0.03). Patients with anti-Xa monitoring required 1 fewer adjustment per 2.5 patient-days of UFH with the venous thromboembolism nomogram (P = 0.02). Patients in the aPTT cohort required more infusion interruptions because of supratherapeutic values (P = 0.007) and boluses because of subtherapeutic values (P = 0.044). There were no differences in rates of thromboembolism, major bleeding, or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding between the cohorts.Conclusion and RelevanceThis study demonstrated that anti-Xa UFH monitoring integrated with a calculation-free nomogram results in faster time to therapeutic anticoagulation and fewer dose adjustments compared with aPTT monitoring with manual calculations.
BackgroundAccurate monitoring of intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) is essential to mitigate the risk of adverse drug events associated with dosing errors. Although recent data support anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) monitoring preferentially over activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) to improve time to therapeutic anticoagulation, the utility of incorporating anti-Xa monitoring with a calculation-free weight-based UFH nomogram has not been formally evaluated.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to evaluate the time to therapeutic anticoagulation of a calculation-free weight-based UFH nomogram integrated with anti-Xa monitoring versus a historical control of aPTT monitoring utilizing manual dose calculations.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of patients with anti-Xa monitoring and a novel calculation-free weight-based UFH nomogram compared with a historical control with aPTT monitoring and manual calculations.ResultsA total of 103 patients in the aPTT cohort and 100 patients in the anti-Xa cohort were analyzed. The anti-Xa cohort achieved goal therapeutic target 3.8 hours sooner than the aPTT cohort (P = 0.03). Patients with anti-Xa monitoring required 1 fewer adjustment per 2.5 patient-days of UFH with the venous thromboembolism nomogram (P = 0.02). Patients in the aPTT cohort required more infusion interruptions because of supratherapeutic values (P = 0.007) and boluses because of subtherapeutic values (P = 0.044). There were no differences in rates of thromboembolism, major bleeding, or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding between the cohorts.Conclusion and RelevanceThis study demonstrated that anti-Xa UFH monitoring integrated with a calculation-free nomogram results in faster time to therapeutic anticoagulation and fewer dose adjustments compared with aPTT monitoring with manual calculations.
