The caller alleged discrepant low inratio inr results in comparison to the laboratory inr result.Results are as follows:
date inratio inr laboratory inr
(b)(6) 2015 1.4 4.9
therapeutic range: 2.5 - 3.5
the time between testing was three (3) to four (4) hours.The customer added multiple drops of blood to the sample well on the inratio testing strip.This is considered to be an improper technique.Additionally, the caller reported a history of lupus.On (b)(6) 2015, the customer took only 2mg of warfarin instead of 5mg based on the laboratory inr result.On (b)(6) 2015, the inratio inr was 1.2.There was no reported reference comparison.There was no additional information provided.
|
Investigation/conclusion: it is indicated that product is not returning for evaluation.Since the product associated with the complaint was not returned, a review of in-house testing was performed.The retain strip testing results met both accuracy and repeatability criteria.The product performed as expected and no product deficiencies were observed.The manufacturing records for the lot were reviewed.The lot met specifications and no non-conformances were documented.Improper technique was identified in the complaint.This cannot be ruled out as a possible root cause for the unexpected results.The customer has lupus.Testing with an aps-insensitive laboratory method is recommended for these patients.The customer's current health status cannot be ruled out as a possible root cause for the unexpected results.Based on the information available, there is no indication of a product deficiency and no corrective action is required at this time.
|