Original Article

Improving Inpatient Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis

Authors: Glenn C. Shedd, RN, DNP, Christine Franklin, MA, Autumn M. Schumacher, RN, PhD, Dale E. Green, MD

Abstract


Objectives: The number and types of inpatients given inadequate prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are not known; patients receive less than appropriate prophylaxis with some frequency.


Methods: Initially we evaluated VTE prophylaxis at a community hospital by comparing prophylaxis patterns in adult inpatients for whom some prophylaxis was indicated. Patients were categorized as medical, general surgery, and orthopedic, then categorized as “appropriate,” “suboptimal,” or “none” in terms of VTE prophylaxis. After initial data collection, we performed an intervention on medical patients using a VTE risk assessment tool; a printed evaluation containing the VTE risk assessment score with related VTE prophylaxis regimens was placed in the patients' charts, after which prophylaxis patterns were compared between preintervention and postintervention medical patients.


Results: Initial data collected from 116 medical, 110 general surgery, and 72 orthopedic patients (n = 298) showed that there was a significant association between diagnosis category and level of observed appropriate VTE prophylaxis (P < 0.0001). Fifty-six medical patients (48%) received no prophylaxis, compared to 40 (36%) general surgery patients and 12 (17%) orthopedic patients. In the second phase, 74 medical patients on whom the intervention was performed were compared to 116 preintervention medical patients (n = 190). The findings showed that intervention status had a significant association with level of appropriate VTE prophylaxis (P < 0.0001).


Conclusion: An increase in appropriate VTE prophylaxis was observed after a system-level intervention.



This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Heit JA, Silverstein MD, Mohr DN, et al. Risk factors for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a population-based case-control study. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:809–815.
 
2. Tapson VF, Hyers TM, Waldo AL, et al; NABOR (National Anticoagulation Benchmark and Outcomes Report) Steering Committee. Antithrombotic therapy practices in US hospitals in an era of practice guidelines. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:1458–1464.
 
3. Anderson FA. Magnitude of the problem of venous thromboembolism in USA. Symposium conducted at Brigham and Women's Hospital's 2006 Thrombosis and Thromboembolism: New Strategies for Improved Patient Care. Boston, MA, 2006.
 
4. Haas S. Recommendations for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism: International Consensus and the American College of Chest Physicians Fifth Consensus Conference on antithrombotic therapy. Curr Opin Pulm Med 2000;6:314–320.
 
5. Hirsh J, Guyatt G, Albers GW, et al. The seventh ACCP conference on antithrombotic and thrombolytic therapy: evidence-based guidelines. Chest 2004;126:172S–173S.
 
6. Cohen AT, Tapson VF, Bergmann JF, et al; ENDORSE Investigators. Venous thromboembolism risk and prophylaxis in the acute hospital care setting (ENDORSE study): a multinational cross-sectional study. Lancet 2008;371:387–394.
 
7. Caprini JA. Thrombosis risk assessment as a guide to quality patient care. Dis Mon 2005;51:70–78.
 
8. Caprini JA, Arcelus JI, Reyna JJ. Effective risk stratification of surgical and nonsurgical patients for venous thromboembolic disease. Semin Hematol 2001;38(2 suppl 5):12–19.
 
9. Geerts WH, Pineo GF, Heit JA, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism: the seventh ACCP conference on antithrombotic and thrombolytic therapy. Chest 2004;126(suppl 3):338S–400S.
 
10. Kucher N, Koo S, Quiroz R, et al. Electronic alerts to prevent venous thromboembolism among hospitalized patients. N Engl J Med 2005;352:969–977.
 
11. Kroger K, Weiland D, Ose C, et al. Risk factors for venous thromboembolic events in cancer patients. Ann Oncol 2006;17:297–303.
 
12. Kleinbart J, Williams MV, Rask K. Making health care safer: a critical analysis of patient safety practices. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment: Number 43. AHRQ Publication No. 01-E058, July 2001. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/ptsafety/. Accessed May 12, 2007.
 
13. Arnold DM, Kahn SR, Shrier I. Missed opportunities for prevention of venous thromboembolism: an evaluation of the use of thromboprophylaxis guidelines. Chest 2001;120:1964–1971.
 
14. Goldhaber SZ, Dunn K, MacDougall RC. New onset of venous thromboembolism among hospitalized patients at Brigham and Women's Hospital is caused more often by prophylaxis failure than by withholding treatment. Chest 2000;118:1680–1684.
 
15. Piazza G, Seddighzadeh A, Goldhaber SZ. Double trouble for 2609 hospitalized medical patients who developed deep vein thrombosis: prophylaxis omitted more often and pulmonary embolism more frequent. Chest 2007;132:554–561.
 
16. Monreal M, Kakkar AK, Caprini JA, et al; RIETE Investigators. The outcome after treatment of venous thromboembolism is different in surgical and acutely ill medical patients. Findings from the RIETE registry. J Thromb Haemost 2004;2:1892–1898.