The caller/end user alleged a variance between the inratio inr results.Results are as follows: date: (b)(6) 2015, inratio inr: 1.9 and 2.6, time between testing: testing performed consecutively.On (b)(6) 2015, 3.1 and 2.4, testing performed consecutively.Therapeutic range: 2.0 - 2.5.Reportedly the caller had difficulty obtaining the blood sample and the sample was not immediately applied after the finger stick resulting in the inratio inr result of 1.9.This is considered an improper technique when performing the inratio test.There was no reported adverse patient sequela.There was no additional information provided.
|
Investigation/conclusion: it is indicated that the product is not returning for evaluation.Therefore, a review of the in-house testing history of strip lot 372984a was performed and found to be performing within expectations.The manufacturing records for the lot were reviewed and the lot met release specifications.Improper technique was identified in the complaint when performing the inratio test that resulted in the (b)(6) 2015 inr result of 1.9.This could not be ruled out as a cause of the unexpected result.Based on the information available, there is no indication of a product deficiency and no corrective action is required.
|