Venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk stratification in general medical patients at an academic medical center

被引:9
|
作者
Fritz, Megan Kunka [1 ]
Kincaid, Scott E. [1 ]
Sargent, Charles G. [2 ]
Green, Amanda H. [3 ]
Davis, George A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Kentucky HealthCare, Pharm Dept, 800 Rose St, Lexington, KY 40536 USA
[2] Univ Kentucky HealthCare, Div Hosp Med, 800 Rose St, Lexington, KY 40536 USA
[3] Univ Kentucky HealthCare, Dept Nursing, 800 Rose St, Lexington, KY 40536 USA
关键词
Venous thromboembolism; Classification; Risk factors; Low molecular weight heparin; Heparin; PROPHYLAXIS; PREVENTION; GUIDELINES; THROMBOSIS; MODEL;
D O I
10.1007/s11239-020-02144-1
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (VTE) is still a concern for general medical patients. Pharmacologic prophylaxis can reduce VTE incidence, but there is the potential for adverse effects. Therefore, determining which patients should receive VTE prophylaxis via risk scoring tools is essential. Limited evidence exists for the ideal venous thromboembolism risk assessment model (RAM) in hospitalized medical patients, as compared to other hospitalized patient subgroups such as surgical patients. The primary objective was to investigate the utilization and appropriateness of our institution-based VTE RAM and comparison to the Padua Prediction Score (PPS). This would allow for a gauge of provider risk assessment accuracy as well as appropriate predictive potential of the PPS or whether an alternative to the PPS should be considered. A total of 330 adult general medicine patients were included in this retrospective chart review. When compared to our institution-based VTE RAM, providers predominately stratified patients at a higher VTE risk than the institution-based VTE RAM. VTE incidence was 0.3%, which was lower than predicted. Significant discordance exists between providers' VTE risk assessment and that predicted by RAMs. Our institution-based VTE RAM appears comparable to PPS; however, it was not being utilized by providers, resulting in potentially unnecessary use of pharmacologic prophylaxis. The most appropriate venous thromboembolism risk assessment model for general medicine patients is undetermined. Our providers generally assess patients as moderate or high VTE risk, despite our institution-based RAM which typically recommends a lower risk category than provider selection. Because of provider risk assessment, more patients received pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis than would have been recommended by the RAM, which might correlate to the low incidence of VTE which was < 0.5%, although bleeding complications were not assessed in this study. A prospective study utilizing the Padua Prediction Score (or similar RAM) in general medicine patients is warranted in order to decipher the best method of predicting VTE risk.
引用
收藏
页码:67 / 73
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Acutely Ill Medical Patients: A New Era
    MacDougall, Kira
    Spyropoulos, Alex C.
    SEMINARS IN RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2021, 42 (02) : 308 - 315
  • [32] Stratification of venous thromboembolism risk in burn patients by Caprini score
    Li, Quan
    Ba, Te
    Wang, Ling-Feng
    Chen, Qiang
    Li, Fang
    Xue, Yuan
    BURNS, 2019, 45 (01) : 140 - 145
  • [33] Venous Thromboembolism in Lymphoma: Risk Stratification and Antithrombotic Prophylaxis
    Hohaus, Stefan
    Bartolomei, Francesca
    Cuccaro, Annarosa
    Maiolo, Elena
    Alma, Eleonora
    D'Alo, Francesco
    Bellesi, Silvia
    Rossi, Elena
    De Stefano, Valerio
    CANCERS, 2020, 12 (05)
  • [34] A Roadmap to Implementing Venous Thromboembolism Risk Stratification and Mitigation
    Glassman, Gabriella E.
    Zhang, Michael Z.
    Patrinely, James R.
    Lee, Elizabeth
    Drolet, Brian C.
    Perdikis, Galen
    ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2022, 88 (02) : 219 - 222
  • [35] Prevention of venous thromboembolism through the implementation of a risk assessment tool: a comparative study in medical and surgical patients
    Park, Min Y.
    Fletcher, John P.
    Hoffmann, Carmen
    Lance, Alice
    Gavegan, Fiona
    Hitos, Kerry
    INTERNATIONAL ANGIOLOGY, 2018, 37 (05) : 411 - 418
  • [36] Venous thromboembolism risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis among hospitalized acute medical patients in China - the RAMP study
    Ge, Junbo
    Li, Yuanfang
    Jin, Xuejuan
    Zhou, Jun
    THROMBOSIS RESEARCH, 2010, 126 (04) : 270 - 275
  • [37] Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Medical Patients Receiving Chemoprophylaxis: A Focus on Obesity and Other Risk Factors
    Fontaine, Gabriel V.
    Vigil, Emily
    Wohlt, Paul D.
    Lloyd, James F.
    Evans, R. Scott
    Collingridge, David S.
    Stevens, Scott M.
    Woller, Scott C.
    CLINICAL AND APPLIED THROMBOSIS-HEMOSTASIS, 2016, 22 (03) : 265 - 273
  • [38] Changing Practice: Implementation of a Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Protocol at an Academic Medical Center
    Pannucci, Christopher J.
    Jaber, Reda M.
    Zumsteg, Justin M.
    Golgotiu, Vlad
    Spratke, Lisa M.
    Wilkins, Edwin G.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2011, 128 (05) : 1085 - 1092
  • [39] Scoring Systems for Estimating Risk of Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized Medical Patients
    Barbar, Sofia
    Prandoni, Paolo
    SEMINARS IN THROMBOSIS AND HEMOSTASIS, 2017, 43 (05) : 460 - 468
  • [40] Risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients
    Stuck, Anna K.
    Spirk, David
    Schaudt, Jil
    Kucher, Nils
    THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2017, 117 (04) : 801 - 808