VTE Prophylaxis Therapy: Clinical Practice vs Clinical Guidelines

External Validation of the Risk Assessment Model of Venous Thromboembolism in Multicenter Internal Medicine Inpatients

To external validate the risk assessment model (RAM) of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in multicenter internal medicine inpatients. We prospectively collected 595 internal medical patients (310 with VTE patients, 285 non-VTE patients) were from Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, and the respiratory department of Beijing Tsinghua Changgeng Hospital from January 2022 to December 2022 for multicenter external validation. The prediction ability of Caprini RAM, Padua RAM, The International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE) RAM, and Shijitan (SJT) RAM were compared. This study included a total of 595 internal medicine inpatients, including 242 (40.67%) in the respiratory department, 17 (2.86%) in the respiratory intensive care unit, 49 (8.24%) in the neurology department, 34 (5.71%) in the intensive care unit, 26 (4.37%) in the geriatric department, 22 (3.70%) in the emergency department, 71 (11.93%) in the nephrology department, 63 (10.59%) in the cardiology department, 24 (4.03%) in the hematology department, 6 (1.01%) in the traditional Chinese medicine department, 9 (1.51%) cases in the rheumatology department, 7 (1.18%) in the endocrinology department, 14 (2.35%) in the oncology department, and 11 (1.85%) in the gastroenterology department. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that among internal medicine inpatients, age > 60 years old, heart failure, nephrotic syndrome, tumors, history of VTE, and elevated D-dimer were significantly correlated with the occurrence of VTE (P < .05). The incidence of VTE increases with the increase of D-dimer. It was found that the effectiveness of SJT RAM (AUC = 0.80 ± 0.03) was better than Caprini RAM (AUC = 0.74 ± 0.03), Padua RAM (AUC = 0.72 ± 0.03) and IMPROVE RAM (AUC = 0.52 ± 0.03) (P < .05). The sensitivity and Yoden index of SJT RAM were higher than those of Caprini RAM, Pauda RAM, and IMPROVE RAM (P < .05), but specificity was not significantly different between the 4 models (P > .05). The SJT RAM derived from general hospitalized Chinese patients has effective and better predictive ability for internal medicine inpatients at risk of VTE.

The Benefits and Imperative of Venous Thromboembolism Risk Screening for Hospitalized Patients: A Systematic Review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major preventable condition in hospitalized patients globally. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness and clinical significance of venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk-screening protocols in preventing VTE events among hospitalized patients. Databases, including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane, were searched without date limits for studies comparing outcomes between hospitalized patients who did and did not receive VTE risk screening using standard tools. Twelve studies, enrolling over 139,420 patients, were included. Study quality was assessed using the ROBVIS tool. The results were summarized narratively. The findings show significant benefits of using VTE risk screening versus usual care across various outcomes. Using recommended tools, like Caprini, Padua and IMPROVE, allowed for the accurate identification of high-risk patients who benefited most from prevention. Formal screening was linked to much lower VTE rates, shorter hospital stays, fewer deaths and better use of preventive strategies matched to estimated clot risk. This review calls for the widespread adoption of VTE risk screening as an important safety step for at-risk hospital patients. More high-quality comparative research is needed to validate screening tools in different settings and populations. In summary, VTE risk screening is essential for healthcare systems to reduce life-threatening VTE events and improve patient outcomes through properly targeted preventive methods.

Evaluation of Proton Pump Inhibitors Prescribing Among Hospitalized Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most effective agents for managing acid-related disorders. However, inappropriate prescribing of PPIs is becoming an issue of concern.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the appropriate utilization of PPIs in terms of indication, dose, frequency, and route of administration during admission and discharge. Furthermore, direct costs associated with inappropriate PPI use were calculated.

METHODS

A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at the internal medicine department of a tertiary hospital in Palestine from January 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021. The medical records of patients aged 18 years or older, hospitalized for 48 hours or more, and receiving oral or intravenous (IV) PPIs during their stay were collected and evaluated for the appropriateness of PPIs prescribed according to clinical guidelines.

RESULTS

Of 262 patients, 80.2% had an appropriate indication for prophylaxis (67.6%) or treatment (12.6%). A total of 230 patients were prescribed IV pantoprazole.182 (79.1%) had an appropriate indication, whereas 122/182 (67%) received IV PPI instead of oral without an appropriate indication. Of the 32 patients who received 20 mg of oral omeprazole, 28 (87.5%) had an appropriate indication, dose, and route of administration, whereas 16/28 (57.1%) had an inappropriate frequency. At discharge, 32.5% of patients were discharged with unnecessary PPI prescriptions. The total direct cost of inappropriate PPI Indications and route of administration in 188 patients over six months was $1518.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that most patients received a PPI for an appropriate indication with the correct dose. However, a high prevalence of inappropriate IV pantoprazole administration was observed, resulting in the highest costs, demonstrating the importance of correctly ordering IV medications. Adherence to clinical guidelines, such as those of the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), will improve the appropriateness of PPI prescribing, prevent complications, and reduce healthcare costs.