<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Point‐of‐care testing of coagulation parameters provides a more rapid assessment of test results compared with laboratory testing. A new coagulation monitor (GEM® PCL, Instrumentation Laboratory, Kirchheim, Germany) was evaluated. Point‐of‐care data for activated partial thromboplastin time and prothrombin time (expressed as the international normalised ratio) and turn‐around‐time were compared. Coagulation parameters were compared in the blood of 57 patients with and without heparin therapy. The point‐of‐care and laboratory test results showed a bias (SD) of − 0.26 (4.55) s for activated partial thromboplastin time and − 0.011 (0.150) s for prothrombin time. The average turn‐around‐time was 3 min for point‐of‐care testing vs. 52 min for laboratory testing. We conclude that the reliability of point‐of‐care testing is sufficient for clinical use.
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 12 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |