Innovative approaches to increase deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis rate resulting in a decrease in hospital-acquired deep vein thrombosis at a tertiary-care teaching hospital

Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized trauma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of implementation strategies

Introduction

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis implementation strategies are well-studied in some hospitalized medical and surgical patients. Although VTE is associated with substantial mortality and morbidity in trauma patients, implementation strategies for the prevention of VTE in trauma appear to be based on limited evidence. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature on active implementation strategies for VTE prophylaxis administration in hospitalized trauma patients and the impact on VTE events.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in adult hospitalized trauma patients to assess if active VTE prevention implementation strategies change the proportion of patients who received VTE prophylaxis, VTE events, and adverse effects such as bleeding or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia as well as hospital length of stay and the cost of care. An academic medical librarian searched Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science until December 2022.

Results

Four studies with a total of 1723 patients in the active implementation strategy group (strategies included education, reminders, human and computer alerts, audit and feedback, preprinted orders, and/or root cause analysis) and 1324 in the no active implementation strategy group (guideline creation and dissemination) were included in the analysis. A higher proportion of patients received VTE prophylaxis with an active implementation strategy (OR=2.94, 95% CI (1.68 to 5.15), p<0.01). No significant difference was found in VTE events. Quality was deemed to be low due to bias and inconsistency of studies.

Conclusions

Active implementation strategies appeared to improve the proportion of major trauma patients who received VTE prophylaxis. Further implementation studies are needed in trauma to determine effective, sustainable strategies for VTE prevention and to assess secondary outcomes such as bleeding and costs.

Level of evidence

Systematic review/meta-analysis, level III.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42023390538.

System-Wide Thromboprophylaxis Interventions for Hospitalized Patients at Risk of Venous Thromboembolism: Focus on Cross-Platform Clinical Decision Support

Thromboprophylaxis of hospitalized patients at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) presents challenges owing to patient heterogeneity and lack of adoption of evidence-based methods. Intuitive practices for thromboprophylaxis have resulted in many patients being inappropriately prophylaxed. We conducted a narrative review summarizing system-wide thromboprophylaxis interventions in hospitalized patients. Multiple interventions for thromboprophylaxis have been tested, including multifaceted approaches such as national VTE prevention programs with audits, pre-printed order entry, passive alerts (either human or electronic), and more recently, the use of active clinical decision support (CDS) tools incorporated into electronic health records (EHRs). Multifaceted health-system and order entry interventions have shown mixed results in their ability to increase appropriate thromboprophylaxis and reduce VTE unless mandated through a national VTE prevention program, though the latter approach is potentially costly and effort- and time-dependent. Studies utilizing passive human or electronic alerts have also shown mixed results in increasing appropriate thromboprophylaxis and reducing VTE. Recently, a universal cloud-based and EHR-agnostic CDS VTE tool incorporating a validated VTE risk score revealed high adoption and effectiveness in increasing appropriate thromboprophylaxis and reducing major thromboembolism. Active CDS tools hold promise in improving appropriate thromboprophylaxis, especially with further refinement and widespread implementation within various EHRs and clinical workflows.

Ability of Caprini and Padua risk-assessment models to predict venous thromboembolism in a nationwide Veterans Affairs study

OBJECTIVE

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a preventable complication of hospitalization. Risk-stratification is the cornerstone of prevention. The Caprini and Padua are two of the most commonly used risk-assessment models (RAMs) to quantify VTE risk. Both models perform well in select, high-risk cohorts. Although VTE RAMs were designed for use in all hospital admissions, they are mostly tested in select, high-risk cohorts. We aim to evaluate the two RAMs in a large, unselected cohort of patients.

METHODS

We analyzed consecutive first hospital admissions of 1,252,460 unique surgical and non-surgical patients to 1298 Veterans Affairs facilities nationwide between January 2016 and December 2021. Caprini and Padua scores were generated using the Veterans Affairs' national data repository. We determined the ability of the two RAMs to predict VTE within 90 days of admission. In secondary analyses, we evaluated prediction at 30 and 60 days, in surgical vs non-surgical patients, after excluding patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis, in patients hospitalized ≥72 hours, after including all-cause mortality in a composite outcome, and after accounting for prophylaxis in the predictive model. We used area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) as the metric of prediction.

RESULTS

A total of 330,388 (26.4%) surgical and 922,072 (73.6%) non-surgical consecutively hospitalized patients (total N = 1,252,460) were analyzed. Caprini scores ranged from 0 to 28 (median, 4; interquartile range [IQR], 3-6); Padua scores ranged from 0-13 (median, 1; IQR, 1-3). The RAMs showed good calibration and higher scores were associated with higher VTE rates. VTE developed in 35,557 patients (2.8%) within 90 days of admission. The ability of both models to predict 90-day VTE was low (AUCs: Caprini, 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.56; Padua, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.58-0.59). Prediction remained low for surgical (Caprini, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.53-0.54; Padua, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.56-0.57) and non-surgical patients (Caprini, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.58-0.59; Padua, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.59-0.60). There was no clinically meaningful change in predictive performance in any of the sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Caprini and Padua RAM scores have low ability to predict VTE events in a cohort of unselected consecutive hospitalizations. Improved VTE RAMs must be developed before they can be applied to a general hospital population.

Ability of Caprini and Padua Risk-Assessment Models to Predict Venous Thromboembolism in a Nationwide Study

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a preventable complication of hospitalization. Risk-stratification is the cornerstone of prevention. The Caprini and Padua are the most commonly used risk-assessment models to quantify VTE risk. Both models perform well in select, high-risk cohorts. While VTE risk-stratification is recommended for all hospital admissions, few studies have evaluated the models in a large, unselected cohort of patients.

Methods

We analyzed consecutive first hospital admissions of 1,252,460 unique surgical and non-surgical patients to 1,298 VA facilities nationwide between January 2016 and December 2021. Caprini and Padua scores were generated using the VA's national data repository. We first assessed the ability of the two RAMs to predict VTE within 90 days of admission. In secondary analyses, we evaluated prediction at 30 and 60 days, in surgical versus non-surgical patients, after excluding patients with upper extremity DVT, in patients hospitalized ≥72 hours, after including all-cause mortality in the composite outcome, and after accounting for prophylaxis in the predictive model. We used area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC) as the metric of prediction.

Results

A total of 330,388 (26.4%) surgical and 922,072 (73.6%) non-surgical consecutively hospitalized patients (total n=1,252,460) were analyzed. Caprini scores ranged from 0-28 (median, interquartile range: 4, 3-6); Padua scores ranged from 0-13 (1, 1-3). The RAMs showed good calibration and higher scores were associated with higher VTE rates. VTE developed in 35,557 patients (2.8%) within 90 days of admission. The ability of both models to predict 90-day VTE was low (AUCs: Caprini 0.56 [95% CI 0.56-0.56], Padua 0.59 [0.58-0.59]). Prediction remained low for surgical (Caprini 0.54 [0.53-0.54], Padua 0.56 [0.56-0.57]) and non-surgical patients (Caprini 0.59 [0.58-0.59], Padua 0.59 [0.59-0.60]). There was no clinically meaningful change in predictive performance in patients admitted for ≥72 hours, after excluding upper extremity DVT from the outcome, after including all-cause mortality in the outcome, or after accounting for ongoing VTE prophylaxis.

Conclusions

Caprini and Padua risk-assessment model scores have low ability to predict VTE events in a cohort of unselected consecutive hospitalizations. Improved VTE risk-assessment models must be developed before they can be applied to a general hospital population.

Provider Response to a Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment and Prophylaxis Ordering Tool: Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

Our health system launched an initiative to regulate venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk assessment and prophylaxis with electronically embedded risk assessment models based on validated clinical prediction rules. Prior to system-wide implementation, usability testing was conducted on the VTE clinical decision support system (CDSS) to assess provider perceptions, facilitate adoption, and usage of the tool. The objective of this study was to conduct usability testing with end users on the CDSS' risk assessment model and prophylaxis ordering components.

METHODS

This laboratory usability testing study was conducted with 24 health care providers. Participants were given two case scenarios that mirrored real-world scenarios to assess likelihood of use and adoption. During each case scenario, participants engaged in a think-aloud session, verbalizing their decision-making process while interacting with the tool. Following each case scenario, participants completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) and a posttask interview. Participants' comments and interactions with the VTE CDSS were placed into coding categories and analyzed for generalizable themes by three independent coders.

RESULTS

Of the 24 participants, 50% were female and the mean age of all participants was 32.76 years. The average SUS across the different services lines was 72.39 (C grade). Each participant's comments were grouped into three overarching themes: functionality, visibility/navigation, and content. Comments included personalizing workflow for each service line, minimizing the number of clicks, clearly defining risk models, including background on risk scores, and providing treatment guidelines for order sets.

CONCLUSION

An important step toward providing quality health care to patients at risk of developing a VTE event is providing user-friendly tools to providers. Following usability testing, our study revealed opportunities to positively impact provider behavior and acceptance. The rigor and breadth of this usability testing study and adoption of the optimizations should increase provider adoption and retention of the VTE CDSS.

Risk-assessment models for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients: an overview of systematic reviews

Multiple risk-assessment models (RAMs) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized medical patients have been developed. To inform the 2018 American Society of Hematology (ASH) guidelines on VTE, we conducted an overview of systematic reviews to identify and summarize evidence related to RAMs for VTE and bleeding in medical inpatients. We searched Epistemonikos, the Cochrane Database, Medline, and Embase from 2005 through June 2017 and then updated the search in January 2020 to identify systematic reviews that included RAMs for VTE and bleeding in medical inpatients. We conducted study selection, data abstraction and quality assessment (using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews [ROBIS] tool) independently and in duplicate. We described the characteristics of the reviews and their included studies, and compared the identified RAMs using narrative synthesis. Of 15 348 citations, we included 2 systematic reviews, of which 1 had low risk of bias. The reviews included 19 unique studies reporting on 15 RAMs. Seven of the RAMs were derived using individual patient data in which risk factors were included based on their predictive ability in a regression analysis. The other 8 RAMs were empirically developed using consensus approaches, risk factors identified from a literature review, and clinical expertise. The RAMs that have been externally validated include the Caprini, Geneva, IMPROVE, Kucher, and Padua RAMs. The Padua, Geneva, and Kucher RAMs have been evaluated in impact studies that reported an increase in appropriate VTE prophylaxis rates. Our findings informed the ASH guidelines. They also aim to guide health care practitioners in their decision-making processes regarding appropriate individual prophylactic management.

Risk Factors for the Development of Hospital-Associated Venous Thromboembolism in Adult Patients Admitted to a Children's Hospital

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Hospital-associated venous thromboembolism (HA-VTE) is a leading cause of preventable in-hospital mortality in adults. Our objective was to describe HA-VTE and evaluate risk factors for its development in adults admitted to a children's hospital, which has not been previously studied. We also evaluated the performance of commonly used risk assessment tools for HA-VTE.

METHODS

A case-control study was performed at a freestanding children's hospital. Cases of HA-VTE in patients ≥18 years old (2013-2017) and age-matched controls were identified. We extracted patient and HA-VTE characteristics and HA-VTE risk factors on the basis of previous literature. Thrombosis risk assessment was performed retrospectively by using established prospective adult tools (Caprini and Padua scores).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine cases and 78 controls were identified. Upper extremities were the most common site of thrombosis (62%). Comorbid conditions were common (91.5%), and malignancy was more common among case patients than controls (P = .04). The presence of a central venous catheter (P < .01), longer length of stay (P < .01), ICU admission (P = .005), and previous admission within 30 days (P = .01) were more common among case patients when compared with controls. Median Caprini score was higher for case patients (P < .01), whereas median Padua score was similar between groups (P = .08).

CONCLUSIONS

HA-VTE in adults admitted to children's hospitals is an important consideration in a growing high-risk patient population. HA-VTE characteristics in our study were more similar to published data in pediatrics.

Thromboprophylaxis prescribing among junior doctors: the impact of educational interventions

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in an important aspect of the care of hospitalised patients, for which the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has issued guidance. Guidance compliance continues to be a concern. Junior doctors are the main group responsible for prescribing thromboprophylaxis. We aimed to compare local pharmacological thromboprophylaxis prescribing against NICE guidelines in a surgical department at a district general hospital, and determine whether interventions aimed at improving compliance were effective.

Methods

Over four months, a two cycle audit of prescribing patterns for VTE prophylaxis was performed using data collected at four intervals: 1. Baseline 2. Following pro-forma introduction and feedback 3. A second baseline data collection. 4. Following VTE prophylaxis teaching.

Results

A total of 394 admissions were included. Correct identification and prescribing for at-risk patients ranged between 76 and 93 %, whilst risk assessment documentation and explanation to patients occurred in fewer than 50 and 66 % respectively. Prescribing and risk assessment improved in the first cycle (chi2 = 6.75, p = 0.009 and chi2 = 10.70, p = 0.001 respectively), a consequence of one specialty improving following additional feedback. Teaching was not associated with improvements. Overall compliance with NICE guidelines was achieved in no more than 25 % of admissions.

Conclusions

Despite junior doctors generally prescribing VTE thromboprophylaxis appropriately, overall compliance with guidelines remained poor regardless of educational interventions. Verbal feedback was the only intervention associated with modest improvements. A pressurised work environment may limit the impact of educational interventions. Guidance simplification or devolving responsibility to other members of staff may improve compliance.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1480-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Use of provider-level dashboards and pay-for-performance in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Despite safe and cost-effective venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention measures, VTE prophylaxis rates are often suboptimal. Healthcare reform efforts emphasize transparency through programs to report performance and payment incentives through pay-for-performance programs.

OBJECTIVE

To sequentially examine an individualized physician dashboard and pay-for-performance program to improve VTE prophylaxis rates among hospitalists.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of 3144 inpatient admissions. After a baseline observation period, VTE prophylaxis compliance was compared during both interventions.

SETTING

A 1060-bed tertiary care medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-eight part-time and full-time academic hospitalists.

INTERVENTIONS

A Web-based hospitalist dashboard provided VTE prophylaxis feedback. After 6 months of feedback only, a pay-for-performance program was incorporated, with graduated payouts for compliance rates of 80% to 100%.

MEASUREMENTS

Prescription of American College of Chest Physicians' guideline-compliant VTE prophylaxis and subsequent pay-for-performance payments.

RESULTS

Monthly VTE prophylaxis compliance rates were 86% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 85-88), 90% (95% CI: 88-93), and 94% (95% CI: 93-96) during the baseline, dashboard, and combined dashboard/pay-for-performance periods, respectively. Compliance significantly improved with the use of the dashboard (P = 0.01) and addition of the pay-for-performance program (P = 0.01). The highest rate of improvement occurred with the dashboard (1.58%/month; P = 0.01). Annual individual physician performance payments ranged from $53 to $1244 (mean $633; standard deviation ±$350).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct feedback using dashboards was associated with significantly improved compliance, with further improvement after incorporating an individual physician pay-for-performance program. Real-time dashboards and physician-level incentives may assist hospitals in achieving higher safety and quality benchmarks.

Interventions for implementation of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical and surgical patients at risk for venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that using thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients at risk for VTE is safe, effective and cost-effective. Despite this, prophylactic therapies for VTE are underutilized. System-wide interventions may be more effective to improve the use of VTE prophylaxis than relying on individual providers' prescribing behaviors.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions designed to increase the implementation of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized adult medical and surgical patients at risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE), assessed in terms of: 1. Increase in the proportion of patients who receive prophylaxis and appropriate prophylaxis 2. Reduction in risk of symptomatic VTE3. Reduction in risk of asymptomatic VTE4. Safety of the intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator (TSC) searched the Group's Specialised Register (last searched July 2010) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library) 2010, Issue 3. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases (19 April 2010) as well as the reference lists of relevant review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all studies whose interventions aimed to increase the use of prophylaxis and/or appropriate prophylaxis, decrease the proportion of symptomatic VTE, or decrease the proportion of asymptomatic VTE in hospitalized adult patients. We excluded studies that simply distributed published guidelines and studies whose interventions were not clearly described.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We collected the following outcomes: the proportion of patients who received prophylaxis (RP), the proportion of patients who received appropriate prophylaxis (RAP) (primary outcomes), and the occurrence of symptomatic VTE, asymptomatic VTE, and safety outcomes such as bleeding. We categorized interventions into education, alerts, and multifaceted interventions. We meta-analyzed RCTs and non-randomized studies (NRS) separately by random effects meta-analysis, and assessed heterogeneity using the I(2)statistic and subgroup analyses. Before analysis, we decided that results would be pooled if three or more studies were available for a particular intervention. We assessed publication bias using funnel plots and cumulative meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 55 studies. One of these reported data in patient-days and could not be quantitatively analyzed with the others. The 54 remaining studies (8 RCTs and 46 NRS) eligible for inclusion in our quantitative synthesis enrolled a total of 78,343 participants. Among RCTs, there were sufficient data to pool results for one primary outcome (received prophylaxis) for the 'alert' intervention. Alerts, such as computerized reminders or stickers on patients' charts, were associated with a risk difference (RD) of 13%, signifying an increase in the proportion of patients who received prophylaxis (95% confidence interval (CI) 1% to 25%). Among NRS, there were sufficient data to pool both primary outcomes for each intervention type. Pooled risk differences for received prophylaxis ranged from 8% to 17%, and for received appropriate prophylaxis ranged from 11% to 19%. Education and alerts were associated with statistically significant increases in prescription of appropriate prophylaxis, and multifaceted interventions were associated with statistically significant increases in prescription of any prophylaxis and appropriate prophylaxis. Multifaceted interventions had the largest pooled effects. I(2) results showed substantial statistical heterogeneity which was in part explained by patient types and type of hospital. A subgroup analysis showed that multifaceted interventions which included an alert may be more effective at improving rates of prophylaxis and appropriate prophylaxis than those without an alert. Results for VTE and safety outcomes did not show substantial benefits or harms, although most studies were underpowered to assess these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We reviewed a large number of studies which implemented a variety of system-wide strategies aimed to improve thromboprophylaxis rates in many settings and patient populations. We found statistically significant improvements in prescription of prophylaxis associated with alerts (RCTs) and multifaceted interventions (RCTs and NRS), and improvements in prescription of appropriate prophylaxis in NRS with the use of education, alerts and multifaceted interventions. Multifaceted interventions with an alert component may be the most effective. Demonstrated sources of heterogeneity included patient types and type of hospital. The results of our review will help physicians, nurses, pharmacists, hospital administrators and policy makers make practical decisions about local adoption of specific system-wide measures to improve prevention of VTE, an important public health issue. We did not find a significant benefit for VTE outcomes; however, earlier RCTs assessing the efficacy of thromboprophylaxis which were powered to address these outcomes have demonstrated the benefit of prophylactic therapies and a favourable balance of benefits versus the increased risk of bleeding events.

Impact of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis "smart order set": Improved compliance, fewer events

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) affects over 700,000 Americans annually. Prophylaxis reduces the risk of VTE by 60% but many patients still do not receive risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis. To improve our institution's VTE prophylaxis performance, we developed mandatory computerized clinical decision support-enabled "smart order sets" that required providers to assess VTE risk factors and contraindications to pharmacologic prophylaxis. Using provider responses, the order set recommends evidence-based risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis. To study the impact of our "smart order set" on prescription of risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis and clinical outcomes, we conducted a retrospective chart review of consecutive patients admitted to the Medicine service during one month immediately prior to (November 2007) and a single month subsequent to (April 2010) order set launch. Data collection included patient demographics, VTE risk factors, and the use and type of VTE prophylaxis. The pre- and post-implementation cohorts contained 1,000 and 942 patients, respectively. After implementation of the "smart order set", the prescription of risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis increased from 65.6% to 90.1% (P < 0.0001). Orders for any form of VTE prophylaxis increased from 76.4% to 95.6% (P < 0.0001). Radiographically documented symptomatic VTE within 90 days of hospital discharge declined from 2.5% to 0.7% (P = 0.002). Preventable harm was completely eliminated (1.1% to 0%, P = 0.001) with no difference in major bleeding or all-cause mortality. A VTE prophylaxis computerized clinical decision support-enabled "smart order set" improved prescription of risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis, reduced symptomatic VTE and eliminated preventable harm from VTE without increasing major bleeding.

Effective prevention of thromboembolic complications in emergency surgery patients using a quality improvement approach

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention based on industrial process improvement to identify and sustainably correct deficiencies in thromboprophylaxis delivery.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism are major causes of morbidity and mortality in surgical patients, but effective prophylactic treatments are available. Ensuring reliable delivery of the intended thromboprophylaxis is, however, a long-standing problem.

METHODS

Delivery of thromboprophylactic treatment on an emergency general surgery admissions ward was targeted during a multidisciplinary intervention to improve process reliability using industrial quality improvement approaches. Delivery was audited against guidelines before and after 3- month intervention. Clinical outcome was evaluated by reviewing all radiological investigations for suspected Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) or Pulmonary Embolism (PE) from patients admitted to the unit in the 1 year immediately before and that immediately after intervention.

RESULTS

Delivery of thromboprophylaxis according to guidelines was improved from 35% before to 87% 3 months after intervention (χ(2)=87.412, p<0.0001) and sustained at 86% 10 months after intervention. Radiologically identified thromboembolic events occurring up to 60 days after admission in patients admitted for over 48 h fell from 23/3075 (0.75%) before to 9/3080 (0.29%) after intervention (HR 0.39, CI 0.29 to 0.53, χ(2)=6.18, p=0.01292). The risk of thromboembolism in the two groups diverged during follow-up to 60 days, before converging again.

CONCLUSIONS

A quality improvement process resulted in major sustainable improvements in the delivery of thromboprophylaxis associated with a 61% reduction in radiologically detected clinical episodes of thromboembolism 2 months after admission. Further study of this approach to improving care quality is warranted.

Venous thromboprophylaxis in general surgery ward admissions: strategies for improvement

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the adherence to institutional venous thromboprophylaxis clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in general surgery patients and to assess the effectiveness of a multi-strategy improvement intervention.

DESIGN

A prospective before-after study.

SETTING

Two teaching hospitals located in the city of Buenos Aires, Argentina.

PARTICIPANTS

Prescriptions belonging to patients admitted to the general surgery wards were evaluated.

INTERVENTION

A multi-strategy intervention that included (i) simplification of institutional CPGs for venous thromboprophylaxis using a single drug at a single dose, based on the American College of Chest Physicians recommendations, (ii) distribution of pocket cards with an algorithm for the implementation of new recommendations to both, physicians and nurses, working in the general surgery units, (iii) educational talks, (iv) paper-based reminders and (v) audit and feedback.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The adherence of the venous thromboprophylaxis prescription to the institutional recommendations.

RESULTS

The prescriptions of 100 admitted patients before and 90 after the intervention were included in the analysis. The initial rate of adherence was 31%. After the intervention this rate rose to 71.1% (P< 0.001). The major improvement observed was the reduction in omitted prophylaxis in patients at risk of venous thromboembolism from 45 to 13.3% (P< 0.001). In the adjusted model, prescribing compliance with CPGs was five times more likely during the second stage than during the first stage (OR = 5.60, 95% CI = 2.92-10.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Simple and economical interventions such as those described in this study can improve general surgeons compliance with the institutional and international guidelines, thus assuring patient safety and quality of health care.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism in pregnancy: a review of guidelines, 2000-2011

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant women are four to five times more likely than nonpregnant women to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE). The aim of this review is to provide an overview of guidelines in the literature on VTE risk assessment, screening for thrombophilias, and thromboprophylaxis dissemination among pregnant women.

METHODS

We performed a review of the published literature to identify evidence-based guidelines published between the years 2000 and 2011. We searched for guidelines from U.S. and international organizations that identified clinically based practice recommendations to healthcare providers on how VTE risk should be assessed, thrombophilias screened, and thromboprophylaxis disseminated among pregnant women.

RESULTS

We found nine guidelines that met our requirements for assessing VTE risk and found seven guidelines addressing thrombophilia screening. Seven of the nine agreed that all women should undergo a risk factor assessment for VTE either in early pregnancy or in the preconception period. Seven of the nine agreed that pregnant women with more than one additional VTE risk factor be considered for thromboprophylaxis, and five of the seven groups addressing thrombophilia screening agreed that selected at-risk populations should be considered for thrombophilia screening.

CONCLUSIONS

There is some agreement between U.S. and international guidelines that women should be assessed for VTE risk during preconception and again in pregnancy. Although there is agreement that the general population of women should not be screened for thrombophilias, no agreement exists as to the clinical subgroups for which screening should be done.

Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Risk Assessment and Prophylaxis: A Comprehensive Systematic Review of the Facilitators and Barriers to Healthcare Worker Compliance with Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Acute Care Setting

BACKGROUND

Even though guidelines for venous thromboembolism risk assessment and prophylaxis are available, patients with identifiable risk factors admitted to acute hospitals are not receiving appropriate prophylaxis. The incidence of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients is higher than that of people living in the community who have similar demographics. Knowledge of barriers to healthcare professional compliance with clinical practice guidelines and facilitators to improve compliance will aid appropriate use of venous thromboembolism clinical practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this review was to identify the barriers and facilitators to healthcare professional compliance with clinical practice guidelines for venous thromboembolism assessment and prophylaxis.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were considered for inclusion regardless of the designation of the healthcare professional involved in the acute care setting.The focus of the review was compliance with venous thromboembolism clinical practice guidelines and identified facilitators and barriers to clinical use of these guidelines.Any experimental, observational studies or qualitative research studies were considered for inclusion in this review.The outcomes of interest were compliance with venous thromboembolism guidelines and identified barriers and facilitators to compliance.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive, three-step search strategy was conducted for studies published from May 2003 to November 2011, aimed to identify both published and unpublished studies in the English language across six major databases.

METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY

Retrieved papers were assessed by two independent reviewers prior to inclusion in the review using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute.

DATA COLLECTION

Both quantitative and qualitative data were extracted from papers included in the review using standardized data tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Quantitative data was pooled using narrative summary due to heterogeneity in the ways in which data was reported. Qualitative data was pooled using Joanna Briggs Institute software.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included in the review with methodological quality ranging from low to high.Reported compliance at baseline ranged from 6.25% to 70.4% and compliance post intervention ranged from 36% to 100%.Eight main categories of barriers and nine main categories of facilitators were identified. The quantitative and qualitative studies identified very similar barriers and facilitators which fell under the same categories. The studies all had components of education involved in their intervention and the review found that passive dissemination or one mode of intervention was not enough to affect and sustain change in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified 20 studies that assessed compliance with venous thromboembolism clinical practice guidelines, and identified barriers and facilitators to that compliance. The studies showed that many different forms of intervention can improve compliance with clinical practice guidelines. They provided evidence that interventions can be developed for the specific audience and setting they are being used for, and that not all interventions are appropriate for all areas, such as computer applications not being suitable where system capacity is lacking.Healthcare professionals need to be aware of venous thromboembolism clinical practice guidelines and improve patient outcomes by using them in the hospital setting. There are a number of interventions that can improve guideline compliance, keeping in mind the barriers and adjusting practice to avoid them.Venous thromboembolism compliance within rural Australian hospitals has not been determined, however as inequalities have been identified in other areas of healthcare between urban and rural regions this would be a logical area to research.

Medication chart intervention improves inpatient thromboembolism prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Inpatient VTE prophylaxis is underused. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the low-cost, multifaceted Australian National Inpatient Medication Chart (NIMC) intervention on improving the quality of VTE prophylaxis and reducing disease. The NIMC intervention incorporated (1) a VTE risk stratification and appropriate prophylaxis guidance tool, (2) a prophylaxis contraindication screening instrument, and (3) a prophylaxis prescription prompt.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 2,371 consecutive medical and surgical admissions was performed at a regional referral hospital over 1 year both before and after the intervention. Outcomes measured included the frequency of prophylaxis use, timing of prophylaxis initiation, adherence of the prescribed prophylaxis regimen to guidelines, incidence of VTE disease, and prophylaxis-related complications.

RESULTS

Following NIMC intervention, prophylaxis use increased from 52.7% to 66.5% in medical patients and from 77.5% to 89.1% in surgical patients (P < .001). This increase was still evident 12 months postintervention. After intervention, prophylaxis initiated on admission increased from 65.0% to 83.6% in medical patients and from 60.7% to 78.0% in surgical patients (P < .01); adherence rates to recommended guidelines increased from 55.6% to 71.0% in medical patients and from 53.6% to 75.6% in surgical patients (P < .01). More VTE risk factors independently triggered prophylaxis usage postintervention. The improved quality of prophylaxis did not significantly reduce VTE incidence (risk ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.48-1.62). The rate of prophylaxis-related complications remained similar before and after intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The multifaceted NIMC intervention resulted in a sustained increase in appropriate and timely VTE prophylaxis in medical and surgical inpatients.

Adherence to guideline-directed venous thromboembolism prophylaxis among medical and surgical inpatients at 33 academic medical centers in the United States

This study's purpose was to describe compliance with established venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis guidelines in medical and surgical inpatients at US academic medical centers (AMCs). Data were collected for a 2007 University HealthSystem Consortium Deep Vein Thrombosis/Pulmonary Embolism (DVT/PE) Benchmarking Project that explored VTE in AMCs. Prophylaxis was considered appropriate based on 2004 American College of Chest Physicians guidelines. A total of 33 AMCs from 30 states participated. In all, 48% of patients received guideline-directed prophylaxis-59% were medical and 41% were surgical patients. VTE history was more common among medical patients with guideline-directed prophylaxis. Surgical patients admitted from the emergency department and with higher illness severity were more likely to receive appropriate prophylaxis. Despite guidelines, VTE prophylaxis remains underutilized in these US AMCs, particularly among surgical patients. Because AMCs provide the majority of physician training and should reflect and set care standards, this appears to be an opportunity for practice and quality improvement and for education.

Reliability of a point-based VTE risk assessment tool in the hands of medical residents

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are a significant cause of mortality in hospitalized medical and surgical patients. Despite recommendations and guidelines, current evidence demonstrates that VTE prophylaxis remains underutilized in at-risk patients. The process of providing VTE prophylaxis begins with assessing each patient's VTE risk. Using an individualized, point-based protocol in the assessment process is a complex task, and might contribute to variability in VTE prescribing behavior. There are no published data on how reliably residents can perform risk assessment and prophylaxis using a point-based VTE risk assessment tool.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to determine inter-rater reliability of a point-based risk assessment tool by residents early in the academic year.

DESIGN

The design was a cross-sectional-cohort observational study.

SETTING

The site was an academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Case-based clinical vignettes were used.

INTERVENTIONS

Verbal instructions were given to medical residents about how to apply our hospital's point-based VTE risk assessment tool.

MEASUREMENTS

Interobserver agreement was measured of: 1) risk score, 2) risk-stratification, 3) identification of contraindications, 4) VTE prophylaxis plan, and 5) resident adherence to the protocol.

RESULTS

The intra-class correlation (ICC) for the total risk score was 0.66 and the kappa coefficient for risk stratification was 0.51. The kappa scores for absolute and relative contraindications were 0.29 and 0.23, respectively. The kappa score for the VTE plan was 0.28.

CONCLUSIONS

We determined that, following brief instructions early in the academic year, a point-based VTE risk assessment tool has only fair to moderate inter-rater reliability, with suboptimal adherence to the protocol. Both might lead to underutilization of VTE prevention strategies.

Venous thromboembolism: have we made headway?

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a primary cause of preventable hospital death. The need for effective VTE prophylaxis has been recognized by the Surgical Care Improvement Program (SCIP) and the Joint Commission, which is offering VTE prevention as a core measure set, starting October 1, 2009. The adoption of SCIP VTE measures and mandate to publicly report these rates offers the opportunity to improve the use of prophylaxis in surgical patients and reduce VTE-related morbidity, mortality, and costs. Essential to this reduction is a team approach to implementing real-time interventions. Crucial to the success of the team is early identification of each patient's VTE risk and a mechanism to provide key information to ensure that the physician prescribes appropriate prophylaxis. In addition, it may be the nurse who is responsible for ensuring that a patient receives the appropriate prophylaxis, as well as being the first clinician to observe the clinical signs of a VTE event.

An advanced educational program promoting evidence-based practice

Evidence-based practice has led to improved health care quality and safety; greater patient, family, and staff satisfaction; and reduced costs. Despite these promising outcomes, use of evidence-based practice is inconsistent. The purpose of this article is to describe an advanced educational program for nurses in leadership roles responsible for guiding teams and mentoring colleagues through the challenges inherent in the evidence-based practice process. The Advanced Practice Institute: Promoting Adoption of Evidence-Based Practice is an innovative program designed to develop advanced skills essential for completing evidence-based practice projects and building organizational capacity for evidence-based practice programs. Learning is facilitated through group discussion, facilitated work time, networking, and consultation. Content includes finding and synthesizing evidence, learning effective strategies for implementation and evaluation, and discussing techniques for building an EBP program in the nurses' organization. Program evaluations are extremely positive, and the long-term impact is described.

Venous thromboembolism prevention: a systematic review of methods to improve prophylaxis and decrease events in the hospitalized patient

Prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is currently a key initiative internationally and in US hospitals, where there has been a recent focus on national quality initiatives to prevent hospital-acquired VTE. Multiple strategies exist to prevent VTE by increasing prophylaxis rates in the hospitalized setting. Active, multifaceted interventions, including provider education, an active reminder to the provider, and regular audit and feedback to medical and hospital staff, appear to be the most effective current interventions. Active intervention programs have been validated both as electronic alerts, with or without computerized clinical decision support software and, more recently, human alerts, many of which utilize in-hospital pharmacists. A passive strategy, such as guideline dissemination, should not be used as a lone method. Although inappropriate duration remains a key reason as to why at-risk patients do not receive appropriate thromboprophylaxis within the hospital (defined by type, dose, and duration of prophylaxis), few studies address duration compared with hospital length of stay. Preventable VTE is a new quality outcome measure for hospitals but is measured in few studies. Future studies should focus on comparing various multifaceted interventions to assess their effect over time, including endpoints of bleeding for safety, appropriate type, dose, and duration of prophylaxis, overall and preventable VTE, and the impact on unnecessary prophylaxis for patients not at risk.

Designing and implementing effective venous thromboembolism prevention protocols: lessons from collaborative efforts

Hospital acquired venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major source of morbidity and mortality, yet proven prevention measures are often underutilized. The lack of a validated VTE risk assessment model, difficulty integrating VTE risk assessment and prevention protocols into the routine process of care, and the lack of standardized metrics for VTE prophylaxis have all been barriers. Recently, a VTE risk assessment/prevention protocol has been validated, leading to portable strategies achieving breakthrough levels of adequate prophylaxis in a variety of inpatient settings. VTE prevention protocol design and implementation strategies have been collected in implementation guides available from the Society of Hospital Medicine and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. These guides were the centerpieces of national collaborative efforts to improve VTE involving over 150 medical centers, honing the approach to accelerate improvement described in this article. Embedding a VTE prevention protocol into admission, transfer, and perioperative order sets is a key strategy. A VTE prevention protocol is defined as a VTE risk assessment with no more than three levels of risk, tightly linked to recommended prophylaxis for each level. A balance between the need to provide protocol guidance and the need for efficiency and ease-of-use by the clinician must be maintained. The power of this protocol driven approach is bolstered by a quality improvement framework, multidisciplinary teams, ongoing monitoring of the process, and real time identification and mitigation of non-adherents via a technique that measures progress and prompts concurrent intervention, an approach we call “measure-vention.”

Prospective assessment of inpatient gastrointestinal consultation requests in an academic teaching hospital

OBJECTIVES

To assess the completeness of gastrointestinal (GI) inpatient consultations at an academic teaching hospital.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional study of 278 inpatient GI consultation requests evaluated from 1 July 2005 to 31 May 2007. A questionnaire assessing multiple aspects of the requesting health-care providers' knowledge and documentation of patient information was completed by first-year GI fellows. Completeness of the consultation was evaluated by the GI consultation attending physician.

RESULTS

The most frequent consultation requests pertained to patients with GI hemorrhage (52.5%) and were made by first-year residents (56.8%). In 15% of requests, health-care providers lacked basic knowledge about the patients for whom consultations were sought. Conversely, in 17% of consultations, pertinent information could not be located in patients' paper medical chart/electronic medical record. The strongest predictors for a complete consultation were requesters' knowledge of patients' past medical history (P < 0.001), documentation of patients' current illness (P < 0.001), and presence of the providers' admission note in the paper medical chart (P = 0.002). Consultations requested between 5 and 10 PM were assessed to be more complete (P = 0.02), and more incomplete consultations occurred in the first 3 months of the academic year (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In 16% of inpatient GI consultation requests analyzed, crucial patient data were missing or were unknown by the requesting provider. Several aspects of requesting providers' knowledge and documentation of patient information were strongly associated with completeness of inpatient GI consultations.

Optimizing the prevention of venous thromboembolism: recent quality initiatives and strategies to drive improvement

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is associated with a substantial health care and economic burden, yet many VTE events are preventable. Despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines derailing effective thromboprophylaxis strategies, the underuse and inappropriate prescribing of VTE prophylaxis are common. Current national quality initiatives were reviewed to identify strategies that may help hospitals and health care professionals optimize current VTE prophylaxis practices.

METHODS

A computerized literature search was performed using PubMed and MEDLINE, and this was complemented by hand searches of relevant journals and Web sites to identify additional literature related to VTE prevention and quality improvement.

FINDINGS

Many organizations, including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the National Quality Forum, the Joint Commission, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality have developed performance measures, quality indicators, public reporting initiatives, incentive programs, and "negative reimbursement" that are designed to help improve VTE prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

It remains the responsibility of individual hospitals to identify specific areas in which they can improve their VTE prophylaxis rates to obtain positive results from the reporting initiatives and incentive programs. If performance measures are to be met, all hospital departments will need to implement effective VTE prevention policies, including early risk assessment, appropriate prophylaxis prescribing, monitoring, and follow-up. Multifaceted, integrated initiatives involving risk assessment tools, decision support, electronic alert systems, and hospitalwide education, with a mechanism for audit and feedback, may help ensure that all health care professionals comply with VTE-prevention policies and initiatives.

Optimizing prevention of hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (VTE): prospective validation of a VTE risk assessment model

BACKGROUND

Hospital-acquired (HA) venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common source of morbidity/mortality. Prophylactic measures are underutilized. Available risk assessment models/protocols are not prospectively validated.

OBJECTIVES

Improve VTE prophylaxis, reduce HA VTE, and prospectively validate a VTE risk-assessment model.

DESIGN

Observational design.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Adult inpatients on medical/surgical services.

INTERVENTIONS

A simple VTE risk assessment linked to a menu of preferred VTE prophylaxis methods, embedded in order sets. Education, audit/feedback, and concurrent identification of nonadherence.

MEASUREMENTS

Randomly sampled inpatient audits determined the percent of patients with "adequate" VTE prevention. HA VTE cases were identified concurrently via digital imaging system. Interobserver agreement for VTE risk level and judgment of adequate prophylaxis were calculated from 150 random audits.

RESULTS

Interobserver agreement with 5 observers was high (kappa score for VTE risk level = 0.81, and for judgment of "adequate" prophylaxis = 0.90). The percent of patients on adequate prophylaxis improved each of the 3 years (58%, 78%, and 93%; P < 0.001) and reached 98% in the last 6 months of 2007; 361 cases of HA VTE occurred over 3 years. Significant reductions for the risk of HA VTE (risk ratio [RR] = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.47-0.79) and preventable HA VTE (RR = 0.14; 95% CI = 0.06-0.31) occurred. We detected no increase in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) or prophylaxis-related bleeding using administrative data/chart review.

CONCLUSIONS

We prospectively validated a VTE risk-assessment/prevention protocol by demonstrating ease of use, good interobserver agreement, and effectiveness. Improved VTE prophylaxis resulted in a substantial reduction in HA VTE.

Prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in the US: improving hospital performance

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention has been recognized as the most important practice for improving patient safety in hospitals. To be effective, VTE prophylaxis must be appropriately prescribed with respect to type, dose and duration. Large-scale studies of medical discharge records have highlighted low rates of appropriate thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients, especially those with cancer or severe lung disease. Lack of prophylaxis and an insufficient duration are the most common forms of inappropriate prophylaxis. Multifaceted, active, quality improvement initiatives have been developed and shown to successfully increase the appropriate prescribing of VTE prophylaxis in patients at risk. By increasing the use of appropriate VTE prophylaxis in at-risk patients, the disease burden of hospital-acquired VTE and its resulting complications can be reduced.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with peripherally inserted central catheters

BACKGROUND

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) are increasingly used in hospitalized patients. The benefit can be offset by complications such as upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT).

METHODS

Retrospective study of patients who received a PICC while hospitalized at the Methodist University Hospital (MUH) in Memphis, TN. All adult consecutive patients who had PICCs inserted during the study period and who did not have a UEDVT at the time of PICC insertion were included in the study. A UEDVT was defined as a symptomatic event in the ipsilateral extremity, leading to the performance of duplex ultrasonography, which confirmed the diagnosis of UEDVT. Pulmonary embolism (PE) was defined as a symptomatic event prompting the performance of ventilation-perfusion lung scan or spiral computed tomography (CT).

RESULTS

Among 777 patients, 38 patients experienced 1 or more venous thromboembolisms (VTEs), yielding an incidence of 4.89%. A total of 7444 PICC-days were recorded for 777 patients. This yields a rate of 5.10 VTEs/1000 PICC-days. Compared to patients whose PICC was inserted in the SVC, patients whose PICC was in another location had an increased risk (odds ratio = 2.61 [95% CI = 1.28-5.35]) of VTE. PICC related VTE was significantly more common among patients with a past history of VTE (odds ratio = 10.83 [95% CI = 4.89-23.95]).

CONCLUSIONS

About 5% of patients undergoing PICC placement in acute care hospitals will develop thromboembolic complications. Thromboembolic complications were especially common among persons with a past history of VTE. Catheter tip location at the time of insertion may be an important modifiable risk factor.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism: a key patient safety priority

It is more than 50 years since the first publication of a study showing that symptomatic and fatal venous thromboembolism could be reduced with the use of thromboprophylaxis. Furthermore, it is 23 years since the first evidence-based guidelines recommended routine use of thromboprophylaxis for most hospitalized patients. However, despite the overwhelming evidence that thromboprophylaxis safely and inexpensively reduces thromboembolic complications associated with acute illness and surgery, there continue to be large gaps in the provision of this key patient safety intervention and even larger gaps in the provision of optimal thromboprophylaxis. The implementation of quality improvement strategies, both at the national level and in local hospitals, are able to increase awareness of thromboembolic risks, to increase adherence to thromboprophylaxis guidelines, and to decrease both clinically important thromboembolic events and hospital costs. Therefore, the objective is for every hospitalized patient to receive appropriate thromboprophylaxis based on their thromboembolic and bleeding risks.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism: consensus, controversies, and challenges

The last 50 years have witnessed a multitude of publications evaluating the efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness of many different thromboprophylaxis interventions. There is widespread consensus that thromboprophylaxis safely reduces morbidity and mortality. More than 25 evidence-based guidelines, published since 1986, also recommend routine thromboprophylaxis in the majority of hospitalized patients. As a result, thromboprophylaxis is recognized as a key safety priority for hospitals. Some of the remaining areas of controversy that will be discussed in this paper include the role of individual risk assessments to determine thrombosis risk and prophylaxis, replacement of low-dose heparin by low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), the optimal duration of prophylaxis, the role of combined thromboprophylaxis modalities, the safety of anticoagulant prophylaxis with regional analgesia, the use of LMWHs in chronic renal insufficiency, and the emerging role of new oral anticoagulants as thromboprophylactic agents. Despite the overwhelming evidence supporting thromboprophylaxis, rates of thromboprophylaxis use remain far from optimal. Successful implementation strategies to bridge this knowledge:care gap are the most important current challenges in this area. These strategies must be multifaceted, utilizing local, systems-based approaches as well as legislation and incentives that reinforce best practices.