Why the study?
Does a weight-adjusted, anti-factor Xa-targeted enoxaparin protocol reduce symptomatic VTE in trauma patients?
Does a weight-adjusted, anti-factor Xa-targeted enoxaparin protocol reduce symptomatic VTE in trauma patients?
Implementation of a weight-adjusted, anti-factor Xa-targeted enoxaparin protocol significantly reduces symptomatic VTE rates in trauma patients compared to standard dosing.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May warrant targeted enoxaparin dosing in trauma; leaves open need for RCT confirmation.
Enoxaparin regimens commonly used for prophylaxis fail to achieve optimal anti-factor Xa levels in up to 70 per cent of trauma patients. Accordingly, trauma services at the study institution endeavored to develop a standardized approach to optimize pharmacologic prevention with enoxaparin. An enoxaparin venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis protocol implemented in October 2015 provided weight-adjusted initial dosing parameters with subsequent dose titration to achieve targeted anti-factor Xa levels. Symptomatic VTE rate was evaluated 12 months pre- and post-implementation. Data were obtained from the trauma registry and charts were reviewed from electronic medical records. The rate of symptomatic VTE significantly declined post-implementation (2.0% vs 0.9%, P = 0.009). Enoxaparin use was comparable in these two phases validating that the decline in symptomatic VTEs was not due to an increase in enoxaparin use. Symptomatic VTE rate for patients who received enoxaparin in the post-implementation cohort decreased from 3.2 to 1.0 per cent (P = 0.023, 95% confidence interval = 0.124-0.856). There was also a significant decrease in the rate of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (2.8% vs 0.9%, P = 0.040, 95% confidence interval = 0.117-0.950). This approach to VTE prophylaxis with enoxaparin resulted in a significant reduction in symptomatic VTE rates. Implementation of similar practices may be equally impactful in other institutions that use enoxaparin.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bethea et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: