Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients
Key result
Pharmacologic prophylaxis with unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin decreases VTE incidence in critically ill patients, though perceived bleeding risks may lead to inadequate use.
Why the study?
Does pharmacologic prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients?
Population
Critically ill patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism
Design
Review
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Supports routine ICU prophylaxis despite bleeding concerns; leaves open strategies to address underuse in practice.
Structured PICO
Does pharmacologic prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients?
P
Population
Critically ill patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism
I
Intervention
Pharmacologic prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH)
O
Outcome
Incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE)hard clinical
Pharmacologic prophylaxis with UFH or LMWH is a standard preventive measure for VTE in the ICU, but may be underutilized due to physician concerns about bleeding.
Cite This Study
Boonyawat et al. (2015) conducted a review in Venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Pharmacologic prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was evaluated. Pharmacologic prophylaxis with unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin decreases VTE incidence in critically ill patients, though perceived bleeding risks may lead to inadequate use.