Validation of a clinical guideline on prevention of venous thromboembolism in medical inpatients: a before-and-after study with systematic ultrasound examination

Disease burden and unmet needs for prevention of venous thromboembolism in medically ill patients in Europe show underutilisation of preventive therapies

It was the aim of this review to assess the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and current practice patterns for VTE prophylaxis among medical patients with acute illness in Europe. A literature search was conducted on the epidemiology and prophylaxis practices of VTE prevention among adult patients treated in-hospital for major medical conditions. A total of 21 studies with European information published between 1999 and April 2010 were retrieved. Among patients hospitalised for an acute medical illness, the incidence of VTE varied between 3.65% (symptomatic only over 10.9 days) and 14.9% (asymptomatic and symptomatic over 14 days). While clinical guidelines recommend pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis for patients admitted to hospital with an acute medical illness who are bedridden, clear identification of specific risk groups who would benefit from VTE prophylaxis is lacking. In the majority of studies retrieved, prophylaxis was under-used among medical inpatients; 21% to 62% of all patients admitted to the hospital for acute medical illnesses did not receive VTE prophylaxis. Furthermore, among patients who did receive prophylaxis, a considerable proportion received medication that was not in accord with guidelines due to short duration, suboptimal dose, or inappropriate type of prophylaxis. In most cases, the duration of VTE prophylaxis did not exceed hospital stay, the mean duration of which varied between 5 and 11 days. In conclusion, despite demonstrated efficacy and established guidelines supporting VTE prophylaxis, utilisation rates and treatment duration remain suboptimal, leaving medical patients at continued risk for VTE. Improved guideline adherence and effective care delivery among the medically ill are stressed.

Preventing acute care-associated venous thromboembolism in adult and pediatric patients across a large healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Although effective methods for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (VTE-P) have been known for decades, reliable implementation has been challenging.

OBJECTIVE

Develop reliable VTE-P systems for adult and for pediatric patients to reduce preventable venous thromboembolism (VTE).

DESIGN

We used a discovery and diffusion system to first develop an effective system in 1 hospital location, and then spread the principle best practices across the entire 22-hospital system.

SETTING

Twenty-two Mayo Clinic hospitals (adults and children).

PATIENTS

Adult and pediatric patients.

INTERVENTION

(1) Ensure that a VTE-P is declared at admission by providing a mandatory VTE-P "tollgate" that requires the provider to assess the risk for VTE and provide an appropriate order for VTE-P. (2) Use clinical decision support to provide ongoing surveillance and alerts to providers when there is a lapse in the VTE-P plan.

MEASUREMENTS

In adults, VTE compliance as measured by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Core Measures VTE-1 and VTE-2, preventable VTE as measured by VTE-6, and in pediatric patients, appropriate VTE measures as determined by chart audit.

RESULTS

VTE-1 and VTE-2 have approached 97% to 100% and preventable VTE has declined to 0% for the last 3 quarters. Similarly, the pediatric VTE-P screening tool was evaluated and piloted with >92% compliance in risk documentation, appropriate VTE-P >64%, and 0 VTE events during the study period.

CONCLUSION

An integrated system-wide approach can lead to measurable improvements in VTE-P process and outcome measures. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:S15-S21. © 2016 Society of Hospital Medicine.

Determining Indications for Care Common to Competing Guidelines by Using Classification Tree Analysis: Application to the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Medical Inpatients

Background. Substantial variations have been reported in the advice given by competing guidelines addressing the same clinical problem. Objective. This study aimed to assess the usefulness of classification tree analysis in comparing competing guidelines. Method. The authors implemented a classification tree–growing algorithm on cross-sectional data from 818 patients to determine indications for prophylactic heparin treatment common to 4 competing guidelines disseminated between 1998 and 2000 and addressing the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in medical inpatients. Results. The resulting classification tree involved 10 terminal nodes. Its mean accuracy estimated by performing 10-fold cross-validation was 82% (s = 3). The guidelines consistently supported prophylactic heparin treatment for 5 indications: a previous episode of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, recent paralysis of lower limb(s), congestive heart failure with one or more risk factors, recent myocardial infarction, and malignancy with one or more risk factors. These indications involved 257 patients (31.4%) and were supported by robust scientific evidence. Deep vein thrombosis was detected in 27 of these patients (10.5%). Two consistent negative indications involved 347 patients (42.4%). Deep vein thrombosis was detected in 9 of these patients (2.6%). Three indications involving 214 patients (26.2%) were discordant over the 4 guidelines. Conclusion. Classification tree analysis of real patient data is a useful strategy to identify indications common to competing guidelines. These indications should be considered for inclusion when updating guidelines. The findings of recently completed randomized trials have partly resolved the disagreement among the 4 guidelines. This approach may be helpful when developing new guidelines or for identifying topics warranting further complementary clinical trials.

[Prevention of venous thromboembolic events by fondaparinux 2.5mg in patients hospitalized for an acute medical illness. ArchiMed Study]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the average duration of in-hospital treatment with fondaparinux 2.5mg prescribed for venous thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients and to describe the treatment population.

METHODS

Prospective, observational, national, multicentre, epidemiological study, performed in France at the request of the Transparency Commission of the French National Health Authority (Haute Autorité de Santé). This is part of a larger study program that also included a study with similar design in the general practice setting. The hospital practice part of the study was conducted by hospital pharmacists who were asked to include the first 15 adult subjects hospitalized in a non-surgical ward for whom fondaparinux 2.5mg was initiated for prophylaxis.

RESULTS

Fifty-three pharmacists (49.5%) included a total of 718 patients. The average age was 71 ± 16 years (47%<75 years old); 54% were women. For 41% of patients, duration of fondaparinux 2.5mg administration ranged from 6 to 14 days. Eighty-five percent of patients had at least one acute illness related to the prescription of fondaparinux 2.5mg for thromboprophylaxis. Ten percent of the population had at least one risk factor listed on the Case Report Form. Characteristics of patients from the hospital practice study differ from those included in the general practice part of the ArchiMed Study program.

CONCLUSION

The hospital practice part of the ArchiMed Study, which is similar to "audits of practices", shows that the real-life conditions of prescription of fondaparinux 2.5mg in patients hospitalized are generally in line with guidelines with respect to indication for thromboprophylaxis in acute medical illness.

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.

Challenges in implementing government-directed VTE guidance for medical patients: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Implementing venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk assessment guidance on admission to hospital has proved difficult worldwide. In 2010, VTE risk assessment in English hospitals was linked to financial sanctions. This study investigated possible barriers and facilitators for VTE risk assessment in medical patients and evaluated the impact of local and national initiatives.

SETTING

Acute Medical Unit in one English National Health Service university teaching hospital.

METHODS

This was a mixed methods study; National Research Ethics Service approval was granted. Data were collected over four 1-week periods; November 2009 (1), January 2010 (2), April 2010 (3) and April 2011 (4). Case notes for all medical patients admitted during these periods were reviewed. Thirty-six staff were observed admitting 71 of these patients; 24 observed staff participated in a structured interview.

RESULTS

876 case notes were reviewed. In total, 82.1% of patients had one or more VTE risk factors and 25.3% one or more bleeding risks. VTE risk assessment rose from a baseline of 6.9-19.6%, following local initiatives, and to 98.7% following financially sanctioned government targets. A similar increase in appropriate prescribing of prophylaxis was seen, but inappropriate prescribing also rose. No staff observed in period 1 conducted VTE risk assessment, risk-assessment forms were largely ignored or discarded during period 2; and electronic recording systems available during period 3 were not accessed. Few patients were asked any VTE-related questions in periods 1, 2 or 3. Interviewees' actual knowledge of VTE risk was not related to perceived knowledge level. Eight of the 24 staff interviewed were aware of national policies or guidance: none had seen them. Principal barriers identified to risk assessment were: involvement of multiple staff in individual admissions; interruptions; lack of policy awareness; time pressure and complexity of tools.

CONCLUSIONS

National financial sanctions appear effective in implementing guidance, where other local measures have failed.

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.

[Effectiveness of a supportive care form for family physicians]

To assess the effectiveness of a standardized form in altering family physicians knowledge regarding supportive care delivered to their patients. We conducted an uncontrolled before and after study involving 42 cancer patients who were provided with supportive care at hospital. During the intervention study period, a standardized form was sent to their family physician within 1 week of discharge. The use of the standardized form was associated with an increase in the percentages of correct answers regarding consultations with psychologists (95% versus 19%, P &#60; 0.001), social workers (95% versus 14%, P &#60; 0.001), nutritionists (86% versus 9%, P &#60; 0.001), and palliative care physicians (90% versus 52 %, P = 0.006). Yet, the percentages of correct answers regarding discharge arrangements did not differ between the two study groups. The use of a standardized form improves family physician information regarding supportive care delivered to their patients during hospital course but does not alter information on discharge arrangements and follow-up.

Systematic review of practice guideline dissemination and implementation strategies for healthcare teams and team-based practice

AIM

To synthesis the literature relevant to guideline dissemination and implementation strategies for healthcare teams and team-based practice.

METHODS

Systematic approach utilising Joanna Briggs Institute methods. Two reviewers screened all articles and where there was disagreement, a third reviewer determined inclusion.

RESULTS

Initial search revealed 12,083 of which 88 met the inclusion criteria. Ten dissemination and implementation strategies identified with distribution of educational materials the most common. Studies were assessed for patient or practitioner outcomes and changes in practice, knowledge and economic outcomes. A descriptive analysis revealed multiple approaches using teams of healthcare providers were reported to have statistically significant results in knowledge, practice and/or outcomes for 72.7% of the studies.

CONCLUSION

Team-based care using practice guidelines locally adapted can affect positively patient and provider outcomes.

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.

Assessment of risk and prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in medically ill patients during their early days of hospital stay at a tertiary care center in a developing country

AIM

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary thromboembolism (PE) are important causes of morbidity and mortality in medically ill patients. This study was done to assess risk factors and prophylaxis given for DVT and PE in newly admitted medically ill patients during the first two weeks of their hospital stay at a tertiary care center hospital in India.

METHODS

All patients within one week of their admission in intensive care unit (ICU) and wards were enrolled in the study after an informed written consent. Patients who had DVT prophylaxis within the past month or any contraindications for DVT prophylaxis were excluded. A structured proforma was designed and effective risk stratification for DVT was done. Patients were followed for up to two weeks to record any changes in the risk categories and document any signs of PE or DVT if present. Any prophylaxis given for DVT or PE was noted.

RESULTS

Seventy-five percent of patients had the highest risk for DVT and PE. Only 12.5% had DVT prophylaxis within the first two days of admission. Within two weeks of admission, 30.8% of patients were discharged, and 16.2% died. 72.6% of the patients still in the wards belonged to the highest risk category. Clinical signs and symptoms of DVT and PE were present in 25.8% and 9.8% of patients, respectively after the second week of admission. 86% of symptomatic patients belonged to the highest risk category initially and none of them received any prophylaxis. 21.6% of the highest risk category patients died within two weeks of their admission. A statistically significant correlation was found between mortality and risk score of the patients for DVT and between lack of prophylaxis and mortality (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

A significant risk for DVT and PE exists in medically ill patients, but only a small proportion of the patients are given prophylaxis. This study underlines the need to aggressively implement DVT risk stratification strategy in medical patients and provide prophylaxis unless contraindicated.

Low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis for older patients with restricted mobility: propensity analyses of data from two multicentre, cross-sectional studies

BACKGROUND

Although older patients with restricted mobility are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism, they are under-represented in clinical trials evaluating prophylactic treatments against deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether prolonged prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is associated with a lower rate of DVT in older patients with restricted mobility.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional studies were conducted in 50 hospital-based, post-acute care facilities in France in 2001 and 2003. The studies included 1603 evaluable patients aged >or=65 years, including 866 LMWH users (median treatment duration 23 days; interquartile range 13-42) and 737 LMWH non-users. All patients underwent complete compression ultrasonography performed by board-certified vascular medicine physicians. The primary study outcome was proximal DVT. Propensity analyses were used to control for bias in LMWH treatment assignment.

RESULTS

The rate of proximal DVT was 4% (35/866) and 5.7% (42/737) for LMWH users and non-users, respectively (p = 0.16). Prophylaxis with LMWH was associated with decreased odds of proximal DVT after adjusting for baseline characteristics (odds ratio [OR] 0.56; 95% CI 0.33, 0.95; p = 0.03) or quintile of propensity score (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.35, 0.99; p = 0.04). In propensity matched analysis, 342 LMWH users were at decreased odds of proximal DVT compared with 342 non-users (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.24, 1.00; p = 0.04). The decrease in proximal DVT was paralleled by a similar decrease in distal DVT. Compared with non-users, only high-risk dose users had decreased odds of DVT.

CONCLUSIONS

In this observational study, prophylaxis with a high-risk dose of LMWH was associated with decreased odds of proximal DVT in older patients with restricted mobility. Further study is needed before recommending routine prophylaxis with LMWH in these patients.

Practice Guideline Dissemination and Implementation Strategies for Healthcare Teams and Team-Based Practice: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review is to describe and identify the effectiveness of different practice guideline implementation strategies on team-based practice and/or patient outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted, using a comprehensive, reproducible search strategy that revealed 88 studies that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

A descriptive analysis revealed multiple approaches using teams of health care providers with 72.7% of the studies reporting statistically significant results in knowledge, practice and/or outcomes. Of 10 dissemination strategies the most effective were reminders, and audit and feedback. The most popular strategy was education meetings. A secondary analysis revealed different populations with chronic or complex disorders where a team approach was effective in practice guideline dissemination and implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Many of the studies provided caveats to explain how or why the strategies did or did not demonstrate improvements. Overall, authors described complex health care requiring increasingly complex approaches to ensure evidence based guidelines were utilised in practice, including using multiple dissemination and implementation strategies. The review has provided evidence that a multi-pronged approach to dissemination and implementation of practice guidelines will assist in gaining significant improvements in change in knowledge, practice and patient outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of anticoagulant prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical inpatients: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potentially serious complication of hospitalization and immobilization. The use of anticoagulant prophylaxis in acutely ill medical inpatients is still under debate. New data including a recent meta-analysis have recently been published. We aim at studying the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant prophylaxis in acutely ill medical inpatients, and demonstrate differences between meta-analyses due to different data extraction from the heterogeneous studies included.

SUBJECTS

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 1980 to present. Manual searches were performed regarding abstracts from major meetings. Seven blinded randomized controlled clinical trials assessing the prophylactic effect of heparin in acutely ill medical patients were identified and included in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) prophylaxis prevented 48% of symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE), 48% of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (not significant) and 51% of asymptomatic DVT. A nonsignificant trend towards higher bleeding risk during LMWH prophylaxis was found. Death was not significantly affected. We compared our data with a recent meta-analysis with different study selection and data extraction and found similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

As DVT and PE are manifestations of the same illness, VTE, one can argue that anticoagulant prophylaxis prevents approximately half of the expected events. Most medical inpatients have short hospital stays, and a low risk of VTE. The important task for the clinician is to identify patients with a sufficiently high risk of symptomatic VTE to warrant LMWH prophylaxis. Despite differences in study selection and data extraction, our study shows results similar to a recent meta-analysis.

Bridging the gap between evidence and practice in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: the quality improvement process

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is considered to be the most common preventable cause of hospital-related death. Hospitalized patients undergoing major Surgery and hospitalized patients with acute medical illness have an increased risk of VTE. Although there is overwhelming evidence for the need and efficacy of VTE prophylaxis in patients at risk, only about a third of those who are at risk of VTE receive appropriate prophylaxis. To address the shortfall in VTE prophylaxis, the US Joint Commission and the National Quality Forum (NQF) endorse standardized VTE prophylaxis practices, and are identifying and testing measures to monitor these standards. Hospitals in the USA accredited by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to receive medicare patients will need VTE prophylaxis programs in place to conform to these national consensus standards. This review aims to give background information on initiatives to improve the prevention of VTE and to identify key features of a successful quality improvement strategy for prevention of VTE in the hospital. A literature review shows that the key features of effective quality improvement strategies includes an active strategy, a multifaceted approach, and a continuous iterative process of audit and feedback. Risk assessment models may be helpful for deciding which patients should receive prophylaxis and for matching VTE risk with the appropriate intensity of prophylaxis. This approach should assist in implementing the NQF/Joint Commission-endorsed standards, as well as increase the use of appropriate VTE prophylaxis.

Prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients: an observational study

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To determine the risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and the rates of prophylactic measures used in acutely ill medical patients.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary care medical center.

PATIENTS

One hundred seventy-nine patients admitted to three general medical units over 30 consecutive days and hospitalized for at least 3 days.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

On concurrent review of the patients' medical records, 138 (77.1%) of 179 patients received one or more forms of VTE prophylaxis during their hospital stay. Of 41 (22.9%) patients receiving no VTE prophylaxis, 22 (53.7%) had and 19 (46.3%, or 10.6% of the total population) did not have a documented contraindication to anticoagulation. One hundred ten patients (61.5%) had three or more documented VTE risk factors for VTE. The most common prophylaxis was unfractionated heparin 5000 U injected subcutaneously twice/day. Therapeutic anticoagulation was given to 51 patients (28.5%) at some time during their hospitalization for indications other than VTE treatment. Two developed symptomatic VTE (1.1%) while hospitalized. Four patients (2.2%) receiving anticoagulants had adverse outcomes. One patient had minor bleeding, and one developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia without thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

Rates of VTE prophylaxis were higher than previously reported rates, although no formalized guidelines, standardized order sets, alerting programs, training, or risk-stratification tools were used during the study period. Rates of adverse events were low.

Brief report: graduated compression stocking thromboprophylaxis for elderly inpatients: a propensity analysis

BACKGROUND

Graduated compression stockings (GCS) are often used for deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis in nonsurgical patients, although evidence on their effectiveness is lacking in this setting.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether prophylaxis with GCS is associated with a decrease in the rate of deep vein thrombosis in nonsurgical elderly patients.

METHODS

Using original data from 2 multicenter nonrandomized studies, we performed multivariable and propensity score analyses to determine whether prophylaxis with GCS reduced the rate of deep vein thrombosis among 1,310 postacute care patients 65 years or older. The primary outcome was proximal deep vein thrombosis detected by routine compression ultrasonography performed by registered vascular physicians.

RESULTS

Proximal deep vein thrombosis was found in 5.7% (21/371) of the GCS users and in 5.2% (49/939) of the GCS nonusers (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-1.84). Although adjusting for propensity score eliminated all differences in baseline characteristics between users and nonusers, the OR for proximal deep vein thrombosis associated with GCS remained nonsignificant in propensity-stratified (adjusted OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.59-2.10) and propensity-matched (conditional OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.42-2.02) analysis. Similar figures were observed for distal and any deep vein thrombosis. The rates of deep vein thrombosis did not differ according to the length of stockings.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with GCS is not associated with a lower rate of deep vein thrombosis in nonsurgical elderly patients in routine practice. Randomized studies are needed to assess the efficacy of GCS when properly used in this setting.

Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in Acutely Ill Nonsurgical Patients

OBJECTIVE

To review recent advances in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in acutely ill nonsurgical inpatients.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search (1966–March 2005) was done to identify relevant articles relating to prevention of VTE in acutely ill nonsurgical inpatients.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Four major prophylaxis trials, one registry, one guideline, and supporting articles representative of the subject matter from the last few years were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Enoxaparin, dalteparin, fondaparinux, and unfractionated heparin 5000 units every 8 hours are effective in reducing the risk of VTE in acutely ill medical patients, but such prophylaxis is currently underused. Barriers to be overcome include recognition of the importance of VTE in this population, definition of the optimal strategy to assess risks, optimal timing of the risk assessment, optimal prophylactic regimen for a given level of risk or disease state, and optimal duration of prophylaxis. We recommend that acutely ill medical inpatients should be risk-stratified early in their hospitalization. At this time, the specific risk-assessment protocol should be derived from the trial(s) of the available formulary agent(s). Decisions about providing prophylaxis must also be made considering anticoagulant contraindications and renal function. Mechanical methods of prophylaxis should be considered as monotherapy only if an anticoagulant contraindication exists. The optimal duration of prophylaxis is not known, but 14 days was used in recent studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis of VTE in acutely ill medical inpatients is underused. Data provide some guidance for increasing awareness and optimizing patient care.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in medical patients: Future perspectives

Venous thromboembolism is a common potentially life-threatening complication in acutely ill medical patients. Actually, over 70% fatal episodes of pulmonary embolism during hospitalization occur in non-surgical patients. In the absence of thromboprophylaxis, the incidence of venographically detected deep vein thrombosis is about 15% in medical patients and several trials and meta-analyses have clearly demonstrated the prophylactic role of unfractioned heparin and low-molecular-weight heparins. Although over the last years the knowledge of epidemiology, clinical features and prophylaxis in medical patients has significantly improved, there are still several relevant issues to investigate thoroughly. Scarce data are available on a simple way to stratify patients in order to identify those who should undergo prophylaxis and several studies clearly show that thromboprophylaxis in medical conditions is underused. Moreover, in comparison to surgical settings, very few randomized clinical trials on the efficacy of pharmacologic prophylaxis have been performed and no data at all have been published concerning mechanical prophylaxis in medical conditions. According to previous studies and results of very recently published trials, new data are available to tailor low molecular weight heparin optimal dose, whereas the optimal duration of prophylaxis in medical patients is still a matter of debate. Moreover, the possible role of the new antithrombotic drugs in the venous thromboembolism prevention in medical conditions and the optimal management of thromboprophylaxis in patients with ischaemic stroke have not been fully investigated. Although new evidence represents a significant improvement both in stratification of VTE risk and in decisions about the appropriate type and duration of prophylactic strategies in medical patients, additional data are still needed.