Deep Vein Thrombosis Research Today is a free monthly online journal that collates and summarizes the latest research about Deep Vein Thrombosis, including details on dvt, prevention, effects, causes, air travel, blood clots. | ||||||||
|
Effectiveness of a guideline for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in elderly post-acute care patients: a multicenter study with systematic ultrasonographic examination.Sellier E, Labarere J, Bosson JL, Auvray M, Barrellier MT, Le Hello C, Belmin J, Le Roux P, Sevestre MA, Quality of Care Unit, University Hospital, and ThEMAS, TIMC-IMAG, National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS 5525. BACKGROUND: Thromboprophylaxis in elderly patients, including post-acute care patients, is at variance with scientific evidence. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a multifaceted intervention was followed by a decrease in deep venous thrombosis (DVT). METHODS: A prospective preintervention-postintervention study was conducted in 1373 patients (preintervention phase, n = 709; postintervention phase, n = 664), aged 65 years or older, enrolled in 33 hospital-based post-acute care facilities in France. An evidence-based guideline addressing pharmacologic and mechanical prophylaxis was implemented through a multifaceted intervention. The main outcome measure was any DVT diagnosed at routine comprehensive ultrasonography performed by registered angiologists. RESULTS: A DVT was found in 91 patients (12.8%) in the preintervention phase and in 52 patients (7.8%) in the postintervention phase (P = .002). The decrease in DVT involved the calf (7.1% vs 3.6%; P = .005) and the proximal venous segments (5.8% vs 4.2%; P = .18) and remained significant after adjusting for risk factors (adjusted odds ratio of any DVT, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.86). Pharmacologic prophylaxis with either low-molecular-weight heparin at the high-risk dose, unfractionated heparin, and vitamin K antagonist was similar in the 2 study groups, whereas patients in the postintervention group were more likely to use graduated compression stockings (27.4% vs 34.6%; P = .004) and less likely to receive low-molecular-weight heparin at the low-risk dose (24.7% vs 18.5%; P = .006), which was not recommended by our guideline. CONCLUSIONS: A multifaceted intervention addressing venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in post-acute care patients can be followed by a significant decrease in the rate of any DVT in elderly patients. More active interventions are needed to enforce compliance with evidence-based guidelines. Published 24 October 2006 in Arch Intern Med, 166(19): 2065-71.
© 2004-2008 Deep Vein Thrombosis Research Today. All Rights Reserved. |
| ||||||
