What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Cross-Sectional. Population: Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients (n=106). Intervention: Oncology practice. Primary outcome: Proportion of oncologists who thought their patients were not at risk of venous thromboembolism (95% CI 19.8-36.5).

What does this research mean for the field?

A substantial proportion of oncologists underestimate venous thromboembolism risk in cancer patients, with 27.4% believing their patients are not at risk and 17.9% never using thromboprophylaxis. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

September 11, 2003BMJOpen Access

Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism during treatment for cancer: questionnaire survey

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Survey reveals ~27% of oncologists believe their patients lack VTE risk.

95% CI 19.8-36.5
n=106

Why the study?

Venous thromboembolism is common and often fatal in patients with cancer, with increased risk during cancer treatment and combined therapies.

Design

Questionnaire survey

Authors

CKCliona Kirwan

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Many oncologists underestimate VTE risk in cancer; leaves open whether education improves prophylaxis rates.

Study Design

Type

Cross-Sectional (n=106)

PICO

Population

106 oncologists in northern England surveyed to assess their current practice and risk estimation regarding venous thromboembolism prophylaxis during cancer treatment.

Exposure / Comparator

Oncology practice

Primary Outcome

Proportion of oncologists who thought their patients were not at risk of venous thromboembolism (19.8-36.5)

Limitations

No information about the specialties of oncologists who did not respond

Cite This Study

Cliona Kirwan (2003) conducted a cross-sectional in Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients (n=106). Oncology practice was evaluated on Proportion of oncologists who thought their patients were not at risk of venous thromboembolism (95% CI 19.8-36.5). A questionnaire survey revealed that 27.4% of oncologists thought their patients were not at risk of venous thromboembolism, and 17.9% never used prophylaxis.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aaa20a420cf838608fbd4ce https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7415.597

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

September 11, 2003BMJOpen Access

Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism during treatment for cancer: questionnaire survey

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Survey reveals ~27% of oncologists believe their patients lack VTE risk.

95% CI 19.8-36.5
n=106

Why the study?

Venous thromboembolism is common and often fatal in patients with cancer, with increased risk during cancer treatment and combined therapies.

Design

Questionnaire survey

Authors

CKCliona Kirwan

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Many oncologists underestimate VTE risk in cancer; leaves open whether education improves prophylaxis rates.

Study Design

Type

Cross-Sectional (n=106)

PICO

Population

106 oncologists in northern England surveyed to assess their current practice and risk estimation regarding venous thromboembolism prophylaxis during cancer treatment.

Exposure / Comparator

Oncology practice

Primary Outcome

Proportion of oncologists who thought their patients were not at risk of venous thromboembolism (19.8-36.5)

Limitations

No information about the specialties of oncologists who did not respond

Cite This Study

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aaa20a420cf838608fbd4ce https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7415.597

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark