scholarly journals Factors Influencing Prescribers' Decision for Extending Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in the Medical Patient Population following Hospitalization

TH Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 04 (03) ◽  
pp. e218-e219
Author(s):  
Alex M. Ebied ◽  
Jeremiah Jessee ◽  
Yiqing Chen ◽  
Jason Konopack ◽  
Nila Radhakrishnan ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis during hospitalization has clearly defined metrics for risk stratification and practice policy employed to ensure processes of adherence. However, acceptance for practice or even the level and timeline of risk is less clear during the immediate time after hospitalization. With emerging new oral anticoagulant agents, data are available that may influence prescribing in the outpatient setting following hospitalization. A survey was created to determine the level of acceptance or influences for practice surrounding continuation of anticoagulation following hospitalization. Methods This study was designed as a single-center survey of hospitalist and family medicine physician to assess influences to the physician's impression for risk of VTE prophylaxis and knowledge of therapy options. Results Physicians reported depending heavily on medical center protocols for determining anticoagulation at hospital discharge. Prescribing postdischarge anticoagulation was reported to be affected by lack of comfort with prescribing oral medications and concerns with risk of bleeding for all types of anticoagulation outweighing the perceived benefit. Additionally, the decision whether to prescribe these medications at discharge was reported to be related to perceived cost and other patient barriers such as concerns over route of administration. Conclusion Concerns for bleeding were an influence and likely resulted in shorter duration for VTE prophylaxis being prescribed posthospitalization.

2020 ◽  
pp. 089719002096121
Author(s):  
Meghan W. Sorgi ◽  
Erin Roach ◽  
Seth R. Bauer ◽  
Stephanie Bass ◽  
Michael Militello ◽  
...  

Background: The direct comparison of twice daily (BID) and thrice daily (TID) dosing of subcutaneous low dose unfractionated heparin (LDUH) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in a mixed inpatient population is not well-studied. Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of BID compared to TID dosing of LDUH for prevention of VTE. Methods: Retrospective, single-center analysis of patients who received LDUH for VTE prophylaxis between July and September 2015. Outcomes were identified by ICD-9 codes. A matched cohort was created using propensity scores and multivariate analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors for VTE. The primary outcome was incidence of symptomatic VTE. Results: In the full cohort, VTE occurred in 0.71% of patients who received LDUH BID compared to 0.77% of patients who received LDUH TID ( p = 0.85). There was no difference in major ( p = 0.85) and minor ( p = 0.52) bleeding between the BID and TID groups. For the matched cohort, VTE occurred in 1.4% of BID patients and 2.1% of TID patients ( p = 0.32). Major bleed occurred in 0.36% of BID patients and 0.52% of TID patients ( p = 0.7), while a minor bleed was seen in 3.4% of BID patients and 2.1% of TID patients ( p = 0.13). Personal history of VTE ( p = 0.002) and weight ( p = 0.035) were independently associated with increased risk of VTE. Conclusion: This study did not demonstrate a difference in effectiveness or safety between BID and TID dosing of LDUH for VTE prevention.


Author(s):  
Richard C. Becker ◽  
Frederick A. Spencer

Venous thromboembolism represents a true worldwide medical problem that is encountered within all realms of practice. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurs in approximately 100 patients per 100,000 population yearly in the United States and increases exponentially with each decade of life (White, 2003). Approximately one-third of patients with symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) experience a pulmonary embolism (PE). Death occurs within 1 month in 6% of patients with DVT and 12% of those with PE. Early mortality is associated strongly with presentation as PE, advanced age, malignancy, and underlying cardiovascular disease. An experience dating back several decades has provided a better understanding of disease states and conditions associated with VTE (Anderson and Spencer, 2003). Given the potential morbidity and mortality associated with VTE, it is apparent that prophylaxis represents an important goal in clinical practice. A variety of anticoagulants including unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and warfarin have been studied. More recently, two new agents have been developed that warrant discussion. Fondaparinux underwent a worldwide development program in orthopedic surgery for the prophylaxis of VTE. The program consisted mainly of four large, randomized, double-blind phase II studies comparing fondaparinux (SC), at a dose of 2.5 mg starting 6 hours postoperatively, with the two enoxaparin regimens approved for VTE prophylaxis—40 mg qd or 30 mg twice daily beginning 12 hours postoperatively. The results support a greater protective effect with fondaparinux, yielding a 55.2% relative risk reduction of VTE (Bauer et al., 2001; Eriksson et al., 2001; Lassen et al., 2002; Turpie et al., 2001, 2002; ). A European program of three large-scale clinical trials (MElagatran for THRombin inhibition in Orthopedic surgery [METHRO] I, II, and III, and EXpanded PRophylaxis Evaluation Surgery Study [EXPRESS]) (Eriksson et al., 2002a, b, 2003a, b) evaluated the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous melagatran followed by oral ximelagatran compared with LMWH for thromboprophylaxis following total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) surgery.


2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (12) ◽  
pp. 1351-1369 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria L Aimé ◽  
Matthew R Neville ◽  
Danielle A Thornburg ◽  
Shelley S Noland ◽  
Raman C Mahabir ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, collectively known as venous thromboembolism (VTE), are among the most feared yet preventable surgical complications. Although many recommendations exist to reduce the risk of VTE, the actual VTE prophylaxis practices of aesthetic plastic surgeons remain unknown. Objectives The primary aim of this study was to elucidate plastic surgeons’ experiences with VTE, preferred VTE prophylaxis practices, and areas in which VTE prevention may be improved. Methods Members of The Aesthetic Society were queried via a 55-question electronic survey regarding their experience with VTE as well as their VTE prophylaxis practices. Anonymous responses were collected and analyzed by the Mayo Clinic Survey Research Center. Results The survey was sent to 1729 of The Aesthetic Society members, of whom 286 responded. Fifty percent, 38%, and 6% of respondents reported having had a patient develop a deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or death secondary to VTE, respectively. Procedures performed on the back or trunk were associated with the highest rate of VTE. Lower extremity procedures were associated with a significantly higher rate of VTE than expected. Over 90% of respondents reported utilizing a patient risk stratification assessment tool. Although at least one-half of respondents reported that the surgical facility in which they operate maintains some form of VTE prophylaxis protocol, 39% self-reported nonadherence with these protocols. Conclusions Considerable variability exists in VTE prophylaxis practices among The Aesthetic Society responders. Future efforts should simplify guidelines and tailor prophylaxis recommendations to the aesthetic surgery population. Furthermore, education of plastic surgeons performing aesthetic surgery and more diligent surgical venue supervision is needed to narrow the gap between current recommendations and actual practices.


2017 ◽  
Vol 83 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason M. Foster ◽  
Richard Sleightholm ◽  
Duncan Watley ◽  
Steven Wahlmeier ◽  
Asish Patel

The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in peritoneal malignancies can approach 30 to 50 per cent without prophylaxis. Prophylaxis in cytoreductive surgeries (CRS) presents a challenge to preoperative heparin-based therapy because of an increased risk of coagulopathy and potential for bleeding. Herein, we report the large series of CRS and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy receiving dextran-40 prophylaxis. Retrospective chart review of peritoneal malignancies patients undergoing CRS at University of Nebraska Medical Center identified 69 individuals who received dextran-40 between 2010 and 2013. The incidences of VTEs, perioperative bleeding, complications, morbidity, and mortality were determined in-hospital and at 90 days. Of the 69 patients treated, the 30-day VTE rate was 8.7 per cent, and no pulmonary embolisms, bleeding, anaphylactoid reaction, or mortality were observed with dextran usage. The specific VTE events included three upper extremity and three lower extremity VTEs. No additional VTE events were identified between 30 and 90 days. In conclusion, dextran-40 prophylaxis was not associated with any perioperative bleeding events, and the observed incidence of VTE was comparable to reported heparin-based prophylaxis in CRS/hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy patients. This data supports further exploration of dextran-40 as a VTE prophylactic agent in complex surgical oncology cases.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 107602961882328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alpesh Amin ◽  
W. Richey Neuman ◽  
Melissa Lingohr-Smith ◽  
Brandy Menges ◽  
Jay Lin

The objectives of this study were to examine venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis patterns and risk for VTE events during hospitalization and in the outpatient continuum of care among patients hospitalized for acute illnesses in the United States with stratification by different age groups and renal disease status. Acutely ill hospitalized patients were identified from the MarketScan databases (January 1, 2012-June 30, 2015) and grouped by age (<65, 65-74, ≥75 years old) and whether or not they had a baseline diagnosis of renal disease, separately. Of acutely ill hospitalized patients, 60.1% (n = 10 748) were <65 years old, 15.7% (n = 2803) were 65 to 74 years old, and 24.3% (n = 4344) were ≥75 years old; 32.9% (n = 5892) had baseline renal disease. Among the study cohorts, the majority of patients received no VTE prophylaxis regardless of age or baseline renal status (52.1%-63.6%). Rates of VTE during hospitalization and in the 6 months postdischarge were 4.7%, 4.6%, and 4.5% for patients <65, 65 to 74, and ≥75 years old, respectively, and 6.3% and 3.8% for patients with and without baseline renal disease. The risk for VTE was elevated for 30 to 40 days after index admission regardless of age and renal disease status.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Laureano ◽  
M. Ebraheem ◽  
M. Crowther

Objective Extended prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism (vte) after abdominal or pelvic cancer surgery with low molecular weight heparin (lmwh) is recommended by multiple guidelines. The primary objective of the present study was to assess adherence to that guideline recommendation at tertiary care centres within Hamilton Health Sciences (hhs).Methods Given that an estimated 70% of the study population would be expected to receive extended prophylaxis, a sample size of 105 patients was calculated. Patients who had undergone abdominal or pelvic surgery for cancer from March 2012 to December 2015 were identified, and data were collected from electronic health records. The primary outcome was prescription of extended vte prophylaxis.Results Of 105 patients, only 3 received extended vte prophylaxis. Those 3 patients had serous carcinoma of the uterus, transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder, and cecal cancer. Of the 3 patients, 2 were followed by the thrombosis service while in hospital; none of the other 102 patients received any form of extended vte prophylaxis.Conclusions Based on multiple randomized controlled trials, guidelines suggest lmwh prophylaxis for up to 4 weeks after major abdominal or pelvic cancer surgery. Despite those recommendations, postoperative extended vte prophylaxis is not commonly prescribed at hhs facilities. Next steps will include identification of barriers and an examination of how those barriers could be addressed. Failure to use prophylaxis is not consistent with evidencebased guidelines and is placing patients at risk of vte.


2020 ◽  
Vol 92 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Volodymyr Tyselskyi ◽  
Vitaliy Poylin ◽  
Daniel Wong ◽  
Yegor Tryliskyy ◽  
Andrey Kebkalo

Abstract Purpose: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) after colorectal surgery is a well-documented complication, resulting in a general recommendation of extended post discharge prophylaxis. Rivaroxaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, is a daily tablet approved for treatment of VTE and prophylaxis after orthopedic surgery. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety of rivaroxaban for extended prophylaxis after major abdominal and pelvic surgery. Methods: This is a retrospective review of patients undergoing major colorectal surgery at a regional hospital in Kiev, Ukraine. Patients received peri-operative VTE prophylaxis with subcutaneous heparin and then transitioned to rivaroxaban for a total of 30 days. Occurrences of major or minor bleeding, blood transfusion, and a need for re-intervention were noted. Phone surveys were administered on post-operative day 30 to assess compliance and satisfaction with the regimen. Results A total of 51 patients were included in the study with an average age of 62.4 years old. Seventy-one percent of the cases were abdominal cases, 29% were pelvic cases and 59% were done laparoscopically. There was one episode of major intra-abdominal bleeding requiring return to the operating room. There were 2 minor bleeding episodes not requiring intervention. There were no VTE events in the group. The phone survey response rate was 100%. All but one patient reported completing the full course of rivaroxaban. Patients reported that oral prophylaxis was easy to adhere to and preferable compared to injections. Conclusion Implementation of extended prophylaxis with rivaroxaban is easy, safe and does not increase rates of post-operative bleeding.


Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 1762-1762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor F. Tapson ◽  
Herve Decousus ◽  
Jean-Fran[ccedi]ois Bergmann ◽  
Beng H. Chong ◽  
James B. Froehlich ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Despite consensus group recommendations indicating that medical patients should receive appropriate venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, prophylaxis practices remain poorly characterized. This analysis of IMPROVE, a prospective study of acutely ill medical patients, describes in-hospital prophylaxis practices prior to the publication of updated VTE prevention guidelines by the American College of Chest Physicians. Methods Patient recruitment began in July 2002. Patients ≥18 years old, and hospitalized for ≥3 days with an acute medical illness are enrolled consecutively. Exclusion criteria are: therapeutic antithrombotics/thrombolytics at admission; major surgery or trauma during 3 months prior to admission; and VTE treatment begun within 24 hours of admission. Results Data were from 4315 patients (32% from USA) enrolled up to 30 June 2004 in 37 hospitals in 11 countries (76% with 3-month follow-up data). Patients are 50% female, median (IQR) age 69 (50–80) years, median length of hospital stay 8 (5–14) days, median weight 68 (58–80) kg, and 40% were immobile for ≥3 days (median length of immobility 7 [4–14] days, including immobility immediately prior to admission). In-hospital VTE prophylaxis was received by 41% of patients (Table 1). Of patients with no risk factors (44%), one risk factor (40%), or ≥2 risk factors (16%), 25%, 49%, and 67% received prophylaxis, respectively. 12% of IMPROVE patients would have been eligible for inclusion in the MEDENOX study. Of these, only 52% received prophylaxis in hospital. Prophylaxis was provided to 6% of patients during the 3-month follow-up period, and continued in 11% of patients after discharge. Conclusions Only 41% of IMPROVE patients received VTE prophylaxis, with considerable variation in types and regimens of prophylaxis used. While MEDENOX showed the benefits of VTE prophylaxis (enoxaparin 40 mg) in acutely ill medical patients, only half of MEDENOX-eligible patients received prophylaxis. Table 1. Use of in-hospital VTE prophylaxis (N=4315) VTE prophylaxis Patients receiving VTE prophylaxis, % ROW, rest of world; *Excluding elastic stockings and aspirin ≥1 type of VTE prophylaxis* 41 LMWH - USA (Q12h, Qd) 7 (5, 1) LMWH- ROW (Q12h, Qd) 31 (29, 2) UFH - USA (Q12h, Q8h) 28 (15, 11) UFH - ROW (Q12h, Q8h) 6 (5, 0) Intermittent pneumatic compression (USA, ROW) 6 (19, 0) Aspirin (USA, ROW) 4 (7, 3) Elastic stockings (USA, ROW) 6 (3, 8)


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 79-79
Author(s):  
Ashlie Nadler ◽  
Mary Ellen Morba ◽  
Jesse Pezzella ◽  
Jeffrey M. Farma

79 Background: A number of guidelines have been proposed for prolonged venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following hospital discharge for cancer patients undergoing major abdominal or pelvic surgery. However, there is disparity in how closely these guidelines are followed. The purpose of this study was to examine the administration and complications of post-discharge chemical VTE prophylaxis (pdVTE) at an institutional level among surgical oncology patients to help inform policy creation. Methods: A retrospective study at a tertiary referral cancer center was performed. Data was analyzed for patients undergoing surgery in 2015. Chi-square tests were performed. Results: Of 566 colorectal, urologic, and gynecologic surgical oncology procedures performed in 2015, 24% (137) were discharged with a prescription for enoxaparin for pdVTE. An additional 24 patients were already on another form of anticoagulation at the time of discharge. Of the patients discharged on pdVTE, 77% (105) had the prescriptions filled. The compliance rate of those patients was 96% (101). The rate of VTE was 3.5% for all patients. There was a significantly greater rate of VTE amongst patients that received pdVTE (10.4%) compared to those who did not (1.6%) (OR 7.20, CI 2.80-18.46, p < 0.001). For each subspecialty, there was also a significantly greater rate of VTE amongst patients that received pdVTE (p < 0.001). Conclusions: There is a very low rate of pdVTE administration despite current guidelines. Identifying patients who received pdVTE appears to identify patients at high risk for VTE rather than the benefits of pdVTE. Institutional policies regarding prolonged VTE prophylaxis should be implemented to target high-risk patients and to ensure appropriate prescribing practices. [Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document