Vitamin K used incorrectly.....INR 1.8

[GoNightingale]

I am very concerned about an order I received today from a cardiologist (surgeon) that would be taking my patient to cath lab today. The patient's INR in this am's lab results was 1.8. The order read if patient INR is

I always thought that vitamin k is an antidote for over anticoagulation. I'm afraid something happened and i will get in trouble. I don't know because I did not work today.

does anyone have any idea why this doctor would place suck an order?

Thanks.:redbeathe

[spongebob6286, BSN, RN]

did u check the h&h?

[kayty83]

I don't get it. "if patient INR is (GREATER THAN) than 2.0, give vitamin k PO 2.5 mgs.".

Giving vitamin K will reverse anticoagulation, and hence DECREASE the INR, right? So the order as you wrote it would result in an endless cycle of vitamin K doses, since each dose would further lower the INR (even further below the 2 threshold).

I would think you would give the vitamin K if the INR was greater than 2, to enhance coagulation and reduce bleeding risk and lower the INR below 2.

[creo]

I agree with kayty. I assume that there is a confusion between . It happens often, that is why "less than" and "greater than" should be used ( i have a feeling that this is the legal way)