Economic impact of an electronic alert system to prevent venous thromboembolism in hospitalised patients

Venous Thromboembolism Risk and Adherence to Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients in Uruguay: First Nationwide Study

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious, frequent, and preventable medical complication in hospitalized patients. Although the efficacy of prophylaxis (pharmacological and/or mechanical) has been demonstrated, compliance with prophylaxis is poor at international and national levels.

AIM

To determine the indication and use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients in Uruguay.

METHODS

An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, multicentre study involving 31 nationwide healthcare facilities was conducted. Baseline characteristics associated with hospital admission, the percentage of the population with an indication for thromboprophylaxis, and the percentage of patients receiving pharmacological thromboprophylaxis were assessed. The VTE risk was determined using the Padua score for medical patients; the Caprini score for surgical patients; the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) guidelines for pregnant-postpartum patients.

RESULTS

1925 patients were included, representing 26% of hospitalized patients in Uruguay. 71.9% of all patients were at risk of VTE. Of all patients at risk of VTE, 58.6% received pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. The reasons for not receiving thromboprophylaxis were prescribing omissions in 16.1% of cases, contraindication in 15.9% and 9.4% of patients were already anticoagulated for other reasons. Overall, just 68% of patients were "protected" against VTE. Recommendations of major thromboprophylaxis guidelines were followed in 70.1% of patients at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the progress made in adherence to thromboprophylaxis indications, nonadherence remains a problem, affecting one in six patients at risk of VTE in Uruguay.

Evaluating the costs and consequences of computerized clinical decision support systems in hospitals: a scoping review and recommendations for future practice

OBJECTIVE

Sustainable investment in computerized decision support systems (CDSS) requires robust evaluation of their economic impacts compared with current clinical workflows. We reviewed current approaches used to evaluate the costs and consequences of CDSS in hospital settings and presented recommendations to improve the generalizability of future evaluations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A scoping review of peer-reviewed research articles published since 2010. Searches were completed in the PubMed, Ovid Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases (last searched February 14, 2023). All studies reported the costs and consequences of a CDSS-based intervention compared with current hospital workflows. Findings were summarized using narrative synthesis. Individual studies were further appraised against the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation and Reporting (CHEERS) 2022 checklist.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies published since 2010 were included. Studies evaluated CDSS for adverse event surveillance (5 studies), antimicrobial stewardship (4 studies), blood product management (8 studies), laboratory testing (7 studies), and medication safety (5 studies). All studies evaluated costs from a hospital perspective but varied based on the valuation of resources affected by CDSS implementation, and the measurement of consequences. We recommend future studies follow guidance from the CHEERS checklist; use study designs that adjust for confounders; consider both the costs of CDSS implementation and adherence; evaluate consequences that are directly or indirectly affected by CDSS-initiated behavior change; examine the impacts of uncertainty and differences in outcomes across patient subgroups.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Improving consistency in the conduct and reporting of evaluations will enable detailed comparisons between promising initiatives, and their subsequent uptake by decision-makers.

Improvement of appropriate pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalised cancer patients with a multiscreen e-alert system: a single-centre experience

PURPOSE

Thromboprophylaxis use among medical inpatients, including cancer patients, is suboptimal. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a novel multiscreen version (v2.0) of an e-alert system for VTE prevention in hospitalised cancer medical patients compared to the original software.

METHODS

Prospective study including 989 consecutive adult cancer patients with high-risk of VTE. Patients were followed-up 30 days post-discharge. Two periods were defined, according to the operative software.

RESULTS

E-alert v2.0 was associated with an increase in the use of LMWH prophylaxis (65.5% vs. 72.0%); risk difference (95% CI) 0.064 (0.0043-0.12). Only 16% of patients in whom LMWH prophylaxis was not prescribed lacked a contraindication. No significant differences in the rates of VTE (2.9% vs. 3.2%) and major bleeding (2.7% vs. 4.0%) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

E-alert v2.0 further increased the use of appropriate thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised cancer patients, although was not associated with a reduction in VTE incidence.

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

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. While numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that the appropriate use of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients at risk for VTE is safe, effective, and cost-effective, thromboprophylaxis remains underused or inappropriately used. Our previous review suggested that system-wide interventions, such as education, alerts, and multifaceted interventions were more effective at improving the prescribing of thromboprophylaxis than relying on individual providers' behaviors. However, 47 of the 55 included studies in our previous review were observational in design. Thus, an update to our systematic review, focused on the higher level of evidence of RCTs only, was warranted.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of system-wide interventions designed to increase the implementation of thromboprophylaxis and decrease the incidence of VTE in hospitalized adult medical and surgical patients at risk for VTE, focusing on RCTs only.

SEARCH METHODS

Our research librarian conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE Ovid, and subsequently translated it to CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Ovid, BIOSIS Previews Ovid, CINAHL, Web of Science, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE; in the Cochrane Library), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED; in the Cochrane Library), LILACS, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to 7 January 2017. We also screened reference lists of relevant review articles. We identified 12,920 potentially relevant records.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all types of RCTs, with random or quasi-random methods of allocation of interventions, which either randomized individuals (e.g. parallel group, cross-over, or factorial design RCTs), or groups of individuals (cluster RCTs (CRTs)), which aimed to increase the use of prophylaxis or appropriate prophylaxis, or decrease the occurrence of VTE in hospitalized adult patients. We excluded observational studies, studies in which the intervention was simply distribution of published guidelines, and studies whose interventions were not clearly described. Studies could be in any language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We collected data on the following outcomes: the number of participants who received prophylaxis or appropriate prophylaxis (as defined by study authors), the occurrence of any VTE (symptomatic or asymptomatic), mortality, and safety outcomes, such as bleeding. We categorized the interventions into alerts (computer or human alerts), multifaceted interventions (combination of interventions that could include an alert component), educational interventions (e.g. grand rounds, courses), and preprinted orders (written predefined orders completed by the physician on paper or electronically). We meta-analyzed data across RCTs using a random-effects model. For CRTs, we pooled effect estimates (risk difference (RD) and risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence interval (CI), adjusted for clustering, when possible. We pooled results if three or more trials were available for a particular intervention. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

From the 12,920 records identified by our search, we included 13 RCTs (N = 35,997 participants) in our qualitative analysis and 11 RCTs (N = 33,207 participants) in our meta-analyses.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Alerts were associated with an increase in the proportion of participants who received prophylaxis (RD 21%, 95% CI 15% to 27%; three studies; 5057 participants; I² = 75%; low-certainty evidence). The substantial statistical heterogeneity may be in part explained by patient types, type of hospital, and type of alert. Subgroup analyses were not feasible due to the small number of studies included in the meta-analysis.Multifaceted interventions were associated with a small increase in the proportion of participants who received prophylaxis (cluster-adjusted RD 4%, 95% CI 2% to 6%; five studies; 9198 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Multifaceted interventions with an alert component were found to be more effective than multifaceted interventions that did not include an alert, although there were not enough studies to conduct a pooled analysis.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Alerts were associated with an increase in the proportion of participants who received appropriate prophylaxis (RD 16%, 95% CI 12% to 20%; three studies; 1820 participants; I² = 0; moderate-certainty evidence). Alerts were also associated with a reduction in the rate of symptomatic VTE at three months (RR 64%, 95% CI 47% to 86%; three studies; 5353 participants; I² = 15%; low-certainty evidence). Computer alerts were associated with a reduction in the rate of symptomatic VTE, although there were not enough studies to pool computer alerts and human alerts results separately.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We reviewed RCTs that implemented a variety of system-wide strategies aimed at improving thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients. We found increased prescription of prophylaxis associated with alerts and multifaceted interventions, and increased prescription of appropriate prophylaxis associated with alerts. While multifaceted interventions were found to be less effective than alerts, a multifaceted intervention with an alert was more effective than one without an alert. Alerts, particularly computer alerts, were associated with a reduction in symptomatic VTE at three months, although there were not enough studies to pool computer alerts and human alerts results separately.Our analysis was underpowered to assess the effect on mortality and safety outcomes, such as bleeding.The incomplete reporting of relevant study design features did not allow complete assessment of the certainty of the evidence. However, the certainty of the evidence for improvement in outcomes was judged to be better than for our previous review (low- to moderate-certainty evidence, compared to very low-certainty evidence for most outcomes). The results of our updated review will help physicians, hospital administrators, and policy makers make practical decisions about adopting specific system-wide measures to improve prescription of thromboprophylaxis, and ultimately prevent VTE in hospitalized patients.

Compliance with the 2009 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidelines for venous thromboembolic disease prophylaxis in pregnancy and postpartum period in Uruguay

: Venous thromboembolism remains as one of the leading causes of maternal death. Prevention of venous thromboembolism in the obstetric population is challenging as recommendations for prophylaxis have low grade of evidence. Risk factors and prophylaxis guidelines have been highlighted by Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. In 2014, we developed a written alert following this guidelines to guide thromboprophylaxis. The aim of this study is to assess recommendations compliance. This study was conducted at University-Hospital in Uruguay from January 2014 to December 2016. A total of 1035 women were enrolled and stratified in high, intermediate or low risk based on Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidelines. Thromboprophylaxis was recommended for women at intermediate and high risk. Women were followed up to assess symptomatic thromboembolism or haemorrhagic complications. A total of 309 were pregnant and 731 puerperal. Median age was 24 (19-29) years old. Of them, 3.0% (n = 31) were at high risk and 35.4% (n = 366) at intermediate risk. All high-risk women received prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin. Of the 366 intermediate-risk women, 52.7% received prophylaxis. Venous thromboembolism was developed in only one woman of the intermediate group, who had received prophylaxis. Bleeding complications were not observed. Awareness of the thrombotic risk, as conferred by an easy and suitable risk assessment, has the potential to improve venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in pregnant and puerperal women. We have a good guidelines compliance with the written alert in the high-risk women group. However, we have to improve low-molecular-weight heparin indication in intermediate-risk group, especially in postcaesarean women.

European Union-28: An annualised cost-of-illness model for venous thromboembolism

Annual costs for venous thromboembolism (VTE) have been defined within the United States (US) demonstrating a large opportunity for cost savings. Costs for the European Union-28 (EU-28) have never been defined. A literature search was conducted to evaluate EU-28 cost sources. Median costs were defined for each cost input and costs were inflated to 2014 Euros (€) in the study country and adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity between EU countries. Adjusted costs were used to populate previously published cost-models based on adult incidence-based events. In the base model, annual expenditures for total, hospital-associated, preventable, and indirect costs were €1.5–2.2 billion, €1.0–1.5 billion, €0.5–1.1 billion and €0.2–0.3 billion, respectively (indirect costs: 12 % of expenditures). In the long-term attack rate model, total, hospital-associated, preventable, and indirect costs were €1.8–3.3 billion, €1.2–2.4 billion, €0.6–1.8 billion and €0.2–0.7 billion (indirect costs: 13 % of expenditures). In the multiway sensitivity analysis, annual expenditures for total, hospital-associated, preventable, and indirect costs were €3.0–8.5 billion, €2.2–6.2 billion, €1.1–4.6 billion and €0.5–1.4 billion (indirect costs: 22 % of expenditures). When the value of a premature life-lost increased slightly, aggregate costs rose considerably since these costs are higher than the direct medical costs. When evaluating the models aggregately for costs, the results suggests total, hospital-associated, preventable, and indirect costs ranging from €1.5–13.2 billion, €1.0–9.7 billion, €0.5–7.3 billion and €0.2–6.1 billion, respectively. Our study demonstrates that VTE costs have a large financial impact upon the EU-28’s healthcare systems and that significant savings could be realised if better preventive measures are applied.

High incidence of venous thromboembolism despite electronic alerts for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised cancer patients

Many cancer patients are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during hospitalisation; nevertheless, thromboprophylaxis is frequently underused. Electronic alerts (e-alerts) have been associated with improvement in thromboprophylaxis use and a reduction of the incidence of VTE, both during hospitalisation and after discharge, particularly in the medical setting. However, there are no data regarding the benefit of this tool in cancer patients. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of a computer-alert system for VTE prevention in patients with cancer, particularly in those admitted to the Oncology/Haematology ward, comparing the results with the rest of inpatients at a university teaching hospital. The study included 32,167 adult patients hospitalised during the first semesters of years 2006 to 2010, 9,265 (28.8%) with an active malignancy. Appropriate prophylaxis in medical patients, significantly increased over time (from 40% in 2006 to 57% in 2010) and was maintained over 80% in surgical patients. However, while e-alerts were associated with a reduction of the incidence of VTE during hospitalisation in patients without cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15–0.64), the impact was modest in cancer patients (OR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.42–1.86) and no benefit was observed in patients admitted to the Oncology/Haematology Departments (OR 1.11; 95% CI, 0.45–2.73). Interestingly, 60% of VTE episodes in cancer patients during recent years developed despite appropriate prophylaxis. Contrary to the impact on hospitalised patients without cancer, implementation of e-alerts for VTE risk did not prevent VTE effectively among those with malignancies.

Venous thromboembolism risk and prophylaxis in the Portuguese hospital care setting: The ARTE study

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a relatively common complication during hospital stay and determination of VTE risk is critical to choosing the best prophylactic strategy for each patient.

OBJECTIVES

In the present study we studied the risk profile for VTE in hospitalized patients in a group of hospitals in Portugal.

METHODS

Based on an open cohort of 4248 patients hospitalized in surgical, internal medicine, orthopedic or oncology departments, we determined thromboembolic risk at admission by applying a new score, modified from the Caprini and Khorana scores. Thrombotic, embolic and bleeding events and death were assessed during hospital stay and at three and six months after discharge.

RESULTS

The median duration of hospital stay was five days and thromboembolic prophylaxis was implemented in 67.2% (n=2747) of the patients. A low molecular weight heparin was used as prophylaxis in the majority of cases (88.3%). Most patients were classified as high (68%) or intermediate risk (27%). The overall incidence of thromboembolic events was 1.5%. Major bleeding events were recorded in 3.89% of patients and all-cause mortality was 3.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we propose a modified VTE risk score that effectively risk-stratifies a mixed inpatient population during hospital stay. The use of this score may result in improvement of thromboprophylaxis practices in hospitals.

Recent developments in electronic alerts for acute kidney injury

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Efforts to improve outcomes from acute kidney injury (AKI) have focussed on timely diagnosis and effective delivery of basic patient care. Electronic alerts (e-alerts) for AKI have attracted interest as a tool to facilitate this. Initial feasibility has already been demonstrated; this review will discuss recent advances in alert methodology, implementation beyond single centres and reported effect on outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

On-going descriptions of e-alerts highlight increasing variation in both detection algorithms and alert processes. In England, this is being addressed by national rollout of a standardized detection algorithm; recent data have shown this to have good diagnostic performance. In critical care, fully automated detection systems incorporating both serum creatinine and urine output criteria have been developed. A recent randomized trial of e-alerts has also been reported, in which isolated use of a text message e-alert did not affect either clinician behaviour or patient outcome.

SUMMARY

As e-alerts gain popularity, consideration must be given to both the method of AKI detection and the method by which results are communicated to end-users; these aspects influence the degree of these systems' effectiveness. This approach should be coupled to further work to study the effect on patient outcomes of those interventions that have been demonstrated to influence clinician behaviour.

Implementing an evidence-based computerized decision support system to improve patient care in a general hospital: the CODES study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) are information technology-based software that provide health professionals with actionable, patient-specific recommendations or guidelines for disease diagnosis, treatment, and management at the point-of-care. These messages are intelligently filtered to enhance the health and clinical care of patients. CDSSs may be integrated with patient electronic health records (EHRs) and evidence-based knowledge.

METHODS/DESIGN

We designed a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of patient-specific, evidence-based reminders generated at the point-of-care by a multi-specialty decision support system on clinical practice and the quality of care. We will include all the patients admitted to the internal medicine department of one large general hospital. The primary outcome is the rate at which medical problems, which are detected by the decision support software and reported through the reminders, are resolved (i.e., resolution rates). Secondary outcomes are resolution rates for reminders specific to venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention, in-hospital all causes and VTE-related mortality, and the length of hospital stay during the study period.

DISCUSSION

The adoption of CDSSs is likely to increase across healthcare systems due to growing concerns about the quality of medical care and discrepancy between real and ideal practice, continuous demands for a meaningful use of health information technology, and the increasing use of and familiarity with advanced technology among new generations of physicians. The results of our study will contribute to the current understanding of the effectiveness of CDSSs in primary care and hospital settings, thereby informing future research and healthcare policy questions related to the feasibility and value of CDSS use in healthcare systems. This trial is seconded by a specialty trial randomizing patients in an oncology setting (ONCO-CODES).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02577198?term=NCT02577198&rank=1.

Electronic alerts for triage protocol compliance among emergency department triage nurses: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Alerts embedded in electronic health records (EHRs) are designed to improve processes at the point of care.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine if an EHR alert-at emergency department (ED) triage-increases the ED triage nurse's utilization of triage protocols.

METHODS

ED triage nurses were randomized to receive either a passive EHR alert or no intervention for patients with the following complaints: minor trauma with extremity injuries or female patients with abdominal pain. The EHR alert notified the nurse that the patient was eligible for diagnostic testing: radiographs for patients with injured extremities or urinalysis for female patients with abdominal pain.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight nurses triaged 20,410 patients in the 6 months before the intervention and 19,157 in the 6 months after the intervention. Before the intervention, the urinalysis protocol was implemented in 101/624 (16.2%) patients triaged by the intervention group and 116/711 (16.3%) triaged by the control group. After the intervention, the urinalysis protocol was implemented in 146/530 (27.6%) patients triaged by the intervention group and 174/679 (25.6%) triaged by the control group. Before the intervention, the radiograph protocol was implemented in 58/774 (7.5%) patients triaged by the intervention group and 45/684 (6.6%) triaged by the control group. After the intervention, the radiograph protocol was implemented in 78/614 (12.7%) patients triaged by the intervention group and 79/609 (13.0%) triaged by the control group.

CONCLUSION

The use of a passive EHR alert to promote ED triage protocols showed little benefit. Before the widespread implementation of EHR alerts for patient care, rigorous studies are required to determine the best alert methods and the impacts of such interventions.

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban versus enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip or knee replacement in Spain

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) surgery are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin, such as enoxaparin, is standard of care in these patients. Recently, three direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban), have been approved for this indication, but their cost effectiveness is still unclear as it has usually been extrapolated from surrogate venographic outcomes in clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the DOACs versus subcutaneous (SC) enoxaparin for the prevention of VTE after THR or TKR surgery.

METHODS

A decision-tree model was developed using TreeAge Pro 2011 to compare the cost utility and cost effectiveness of the DOACs with SC enoxaparin, with separate models for THR and TKR over a 3-month postoperative time horizon from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. The probabilities of events (symptomatic VTE, clinically relevant bleedings, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and deaths) were derived from a systematic review and meta-analysis. We used local cost estimates (€2013) and utility values were obtained from the literature. We reported costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and symptomatic VTE events. We conducted sensitivity analyses to evaluate parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

The average costs per 1,000 patients treated with enoxaparin were higher than costs incurred by dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in THR (€435,208 vs. €283,574, €257,900 and €212,472, respectively) and TKR (€336,550 vs. €219,856, €251,734 and €201,946, respectively), with cost savings ranging from €151,634 to €222,766 in THR, and from €84,816 to €134,604 in TKR. Cost differences were largely driven by differences in costs associated with drug administration. The average QALYs per 1,000 patients treated were very similar for enoxaparin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in THR (199.34, 198.83, 199.08 and 199.68, respectively) and TKR (198.95, 199.41, 198.75 and 199.97, respectively). Rivaroxaban (in TKR and THR) and apixaban (in THR) avoided additional symptomatic VTE events compared with enoxaparin. Sensitivity analyses generally supported the robustness of the analysis to changes in model parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model suggests, based on its underlying assumptions and data, that the DOACs are cost-saving alternatives to SC enoxaparin for the prevention of VTE after THR or TKR, in the Spanish healthcare setting.

Impact of electronic reminders on venous thromboprophylaxis after admissions and transfers

OBJECTIVE

Clinical decision support has the potential to improve prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The purpose of this prospective study was to analyze the effect of electronic reminders on thromboprophylaxis rates in wards to which patients were admitted and transferred. The latter was of particular interest since patient handoffs are considered to be critical safety issues.

METHODS

The trial involved two study periods in the six departments of a university hospital, three of which were randomly assigned to the intervention group displaying reminders during the second period. At 6 h after admission or transfer, the algorithm checked for prophylaxis orders within 0-30 h of the patient's arrival, increasing the specificity of the displayed reminders.

RESULTS

The significant impact of the reminders could be seen by prophylaxis orders placed 6-24 h after admission (increasing from 8.6% (223/2579) to 12% (307/2555); p<0.0001) and transfer (increasing from 2.4% (39/1616) to 3.7% (63/1682); p=0.034). In admission wards, the rate of thromboprophylaxis increased from 62.4% to 67.7% (p<0.0001), and in transfer wards it increased from 80.2% to 84.3% (p=0.0022). Overall, the rate of prophylaxis significantly increased in the intervention group from 69.2% to 74.3% (p<0.0001). No significant changes were observed in the control group. Postponing prophylaxis checks to 6 h after admissions and transfers reduced the number of reminders by 62% and thereby minimized the risk of alert fatigue.

CONCLUSIONS

The reminders improved awareness of VTE prevention in both admission and transfer wards. This approach may contribute to better quality of care and safer patient handoffs.

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.