Why the study?
Pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis is believed to be underused, but prior studies have not shown associations between increased prophylaxis administration and VTE reductions.
Does implementation of a standardized monitoring protocol to increase pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis reduce VTE incidence in trauma patients?
Does implementation of a standardized monitoring protocol to increase pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis reduce VTE incidence in trauma patients?
Increasing pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis administration in trauma patients via a standardized protocol did not reduce VTE incidence, suggesting a need for targeted rather than universal prophylaxis strategies.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No VTE reduction despite higher prophylaxis rates; leaves open whether targeted strategies outperform universal ones in trauma.
It is generally believed that pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) is underused. However, previous studies have not shown associations between increased prophylaxis administration and reductions in VTE. We here investigated prophylaxis administration and VTE incidence among trauma patients at our facility to determine whether to further increase prophylaxis administration after implementation of a standardized monitoring protocol. Univariate analyses and regression models were used to evaluate the protocol's effect on VTE, identify clinical factors associated with VTE and with receiving prophylaxis, and identify over- or under-prophylaxed patients. A final prophylaxis rate of 71.2% was achieved, an increase from the 40.8% reported by the Trauma Quality Improvement Program in 2015, with no accompanying reduction in VTE (1.5% pre and postintervention). Factors that identified patients at lower probability of receiving prophylaxis were those that increased bleeding risk: severe head injuries (odds ratio [OR] = 0.13) and preexisting bleeding (OR = 0.69) and renal/kidney (OR = 0.46) disorders. A large group of patients was both at increased odds of receiving prophylaxis and at low risk of VTE, representing a group that may be considered for nonpharmacologic options. Examination of current prophylaxis practices and identification of underuse or overuse is beneficial before expending effort to increase prophylaxis administration to reduce VTE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sercy et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: