We worked out TTR values in patients receiving warfarin treatment in Abashiri-Kosei General Hospital. The patients were divided into two groups - those with satisfactory TTR values and those with poor TTR values - and associations between patient factors and average dosing interval were examined in the two groups. A total of 178 patients joined this study. The average TTR value worked out at 65.1±24.8%. It was found that the average TTR value for those patients aged at 70 and above came to 72.7±21.4%, which was significantly high as compared with 51.06plusmn;24.6% for those under 70 years of age. When the average TTR value was calculated after the optimal PT-range for the group of those below the age of 70 was changed from 2.0～3.0 to 1.6～2.6, it rose from 51.0% to 74.9%. These findings made it clear that PT-INR, regardless of age, was under control within the range from 1.6 to 2.6 in this hospital in accordance with the results of the J-RHYTHM Registry analysis.

Objective: We investigated the incidence of side effects related to contrast medium employed in our hospital based on monitoring materials to improve the safety of contrast-enhanced examinations.  Furthermore, we compared the incidence of side effects between the original product and generic drugs to confirm the safety of each preparation.
Methods: The survey period was from April 2007 until March 2011.  Based on the number of patients who underwent contrast-enhanced examinations and that of patients with side effects, we calculated the incidence of side effects in our hospital, and confirmed its annual changes.  Subsequently, we again collected the incidence of side effects per each manufacturer’s preparation employed, and confirmed the state of side effects of individual preparations.  Furthermore, we evaluated the symptoms as side effects, interval until appearance, and treatment for side effects during the data collection period, as well as the subsequent state, symptoms as side effects, and interval until appearance.  The chi square independence test was employed to compare the results among groups.  p<0.05 was regarded as significant (paired test).
Results: There were no changes in the annual incidence of side effects.  There were also no significant differences in the annual incidence of side effects among the preparations.  Furthermore, there were no marked differences in the symptoms, interval until appearance, treatment for side effects, or subsequent state among the preparations.
Conclusion: We investigated the appearance of side effects regarding contrast-enhanced examinations for 4 years.  We confirmed that there were no differences in the incidence of side effects among the preparations.