Key result
The Risk Assessment Profile for thromboembolism (RAPT) demonstrated the highest predictive value for deep vein thrombosis with an AUC of 0.737, though not significantly different from DRAS or TESS.
Why the study?
There are few studies evaluating the prevalence of DVT and the predictive power of risk assessment scales in patients with multiple trauma.
Do risk assessment scales (RAPT, DRAS, TESS) accurately predict the risk of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis in multiple trauma patients?
Cohort (n=210)
No
Do risk assessment scales (RAPT, DRAS, TESS) accurately predict the risk of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis in multiple trauma patients?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.737 (95% CI 0.672-0.795)
Absolute Event Rate: 0.737% vs 0.71%
p-value: p=<0.001
The RAPT, DRAS, and TESS risk assessment scales offer comparable, moderate predictive value for identifying deep vein thrombosis risk in multiple trauma patients.
Comparable moderate DVT prediction by RAPT, DRAS, and TESS in trauma; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Background Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a common complication in orthopedic patients. Previous studies have focused on major orthopedic surgery.There are few studies with multiple trauma. We aimed to describe the prevalence of DVT and compare the predictive power of the different risk assessment scales in patients with multiple trauma.Methods This prospective cohort study involved multiple trauma patients admitted to our hospital between October 2021 and December 2022. Data were prospectively collected for thrombotic risk assessments using the Risk Assessment Profile for thromboembolism(RAPT), the DVT risk assessment score (DRAS), and the Trauma Embolic Scoring System (TESS), respectively. The receiver operation characteristic (ROC) curve and the area under the curve (AUC) were evaluated to compare the predictive power. Doppler ultrasound was used to determine DVT incidence.Results A total of 210 patients were included, and the incidence of DVT was 26.19%. Distal DVT accounted for 87.27%; postoperative DVT, 72.73%; and bilateral lower extremity thrombosis, 30.91%. There were significant differences in age, education degree, pelvic fracture, surgery, ISS, D-dimmer level, length of hospital stay and ICU stay between the thrombosis group and the non-thrombosis group. The AUCs for RAPT, DRAS, and TESS were 0.737, 0.710, and 0.683, respectively. The RAPT had better predictive value, but there were no significant differences between the three ROC curves.Conclusions The incidence of DVT was relatively high during hospitalization. We prospectively validated the tests to predict risk of DVT among patients with multiple trauma to help trauma surgeons in the clinical administration of DVT prophylaxis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Multiple trauma (n=210). Risk Assessment Profile for thromboembolism (RAPT) vs. DVT risk assessment score (DRAS) and Trauma Embolic Scoring System (TESS) was evaluated on Predictive power (Area Under the Curve) for deep vein thrombosis (AUC 0.737, 95% CI 0.672-0.795, p=<0.001). The Risk Assessment Profile for thromboembolism (RAPT) demonstrated the highest predictive value for deep vein thrombosis with an AUC of 0.737, though not significantly different from DRAS or TESS.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: