Right.
I don't see much value in testing daily, and it's not always easy to tell when the results of a particular dose have the most impact on an INR.
For some time, I've been pointing out to some people who don't take the same daily dose that depending on the day that they test, the INR will be different as a result of a particular dose a day, or two, or three days earlier. I tried to point out that if the testing isn't done on the same day each week, there may be a variance that actually reflects the fact that a different dose was taken on a different day. (In my distant past, I took 5 mg on days with a 'T' in their name, and 7.5 mg on the other days. This may have kept me in range - but would have yielded somewhat different INRs depending on which day I tested my INR). This is one of the reasons I like to encourage people to take the same dose each day, if possible. It may not put you into a danger zone on some days and pull you out of that zone on others, but it should keep your INR more consistent, day to day.
When I was finally able to self-test, I also decided that I should try to keep my doses the same (or almost the same) every day of the week, and to NEVER miss a dose. I also saw the flaws in the 'logic' of 'total weekly dose' when it was misinterpreted to suggest that you can make major changes from day to day as long as the weekly total is where you want it to be.
As far as the effects of other things -- I find that greens or doses of Vitamin K have a pretty rapid effect on INR. This is why they use Vitamin K as an antidote in cases when an INR is WAY too high. So -- having those two extra dark green salads could, conceivably, reduce the effects of the warfarin you took two days ago, yesterday, and maybe even this morning.
This whole thing with anticoagulation is still one that doesn't seem to be fully understood. It's one that many medical professionals seem to have learned once, decades ago, and haven't caught up with current understanding of the processes. It should not be hard to find medical professionals who still believe that any source of Vitamin K should be strictly avoided. It certainly isn't hard to find medical professionals who are comfortable with monthly testing or, for those who happen to have 'consistent' INRs two months in a row, who are comfortable with testing every two, or even three, months.
It seems to be a bit of a shame that individuals have to run tests comparing machines, or tracking daily dose and INR against diet and habits; when actual professional research can probably fill the gap that some of us are trying to fill, using our own fingertips and our own limited resources. (Ola used extra test strips, I used multiple meters and strips that I bought for the extra testing).
I can certainly understand why a test comparing meters to lab results would be hard to make happen -- much of the testing may be contracted out to a particular manufacturer, and it wouldn't be a good thing to make that sponsor look bad, would it?
I don't see much value in testing daily, and it's not always easy to tell when the results of a particular dose have the most impact on an INR.
For some time, I've been pointing out to some people who don't take the same daily dose that depending on the day that they test, the INR will be different as a result of a particular dose a day, or two, or three days earlier. I tried to point out that if the testing isn't done on the same day each week, there may be a variance that actually reflects the fact that a different dose was taken on a different day. (In my distant past, I took 5 mg on days with a 'T' in their name, and 7.5 mg on the other days. This may have kept me in range - but would have yielded somewhat different INRs depending on which day I tested my INR). This is one of the reasons I like to encourage people to take the same dose each day, if possible. It may not put you into a danger zone on some days and pull you out of that zone on others, but it should keep your INR more consistent, day to day.
When I was finally able to self-test, I also decided that I should try to keep my doses the same (or almost the same) every day of the week, and to NEVER miss a dose. I also saw the flaws in the 'logic' of 'total weekly dose' when it was misinterpreted to suggest that you can make major changes from day to day as long as the weekly total is where you want it to be.
As far as the effects of other things -- I find that greens or doses of Vitamin K have a pretty rapid effect on INR. This is why they use Vitamin K as an antidote in cases when an INR is WAY too high. So -- having those two extra dark green salads could, conceivably, reduce the effects of the warfarin you took two days ago, yesterday, and maybe even this morning.
This whole thing with anticoagulation is still one that doesn't seem to be fully understood. It's one that many medical professionals seem to have learned once, decades ago, and haven't caught up with current understanding of the processes. It should not be hard to find medical professionals who still believe that any source of Vitamin K should be strictly avoided. It certainly isn't hard to find medical professionals who are comfortable with monthly testing or, for those who happen to have 'consistent' INRs two months in a row, who are comfortable with testing every two, or even three, months.
It seems to be a bit of a shame that individuals have to run tests comparing machines, or tracking daily dose and INR against diet and habits; when actual professional research can probably fill the gap that some of us are trying to fill, using our own fingertips and our own limited resources. (Ola used extra test strips, I used multiple meters and strips that I bought for the extra testing).
I can certainly understand why a test comparing meters to lab results would be hard to make happen -- much of the testing may be contracted out to a particular manufacturer, and it wouldn't be a good thing to make that sponsor look bad, would it?
