Login to your account

Username *
Password *
Remember Me

Blog With Right Sidebar

Evidence-based Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis is Associated With a Six-fold Decrease in Numbers of Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolisms in Rehabilitation Inpatients.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the impact of a standardized risk assessment tool and specialty-specific, risk-adjusted venous thromboembolism (VTE) order sets on compliance with American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines and the number of symptomatic VTE as assessed by administrative data.

DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Academic hospital inpatient rehabilitation unit.

PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: All patients on the rehabilitation unit. METHODS AND INTERVENTIONS: Assessment of VTE risk factors and evaluated admission VTE prophylaxis orders before and after implementation of an ACCP guideline-based, specialty-specific VTE risk assessment, and prophylaxis order set by using a standardized data collection form.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Discharge diagnostic codes for VTE and pulmonary embolism were tracked by ICD-9 (International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition) discharge diagnosis codes for the 12 months before and 36 months after the intervention.

RESULTS: Before implementation of the VTE order set, 27% of patients received VTE prophylaxis in compliance with the 2004 ACCP VTE guidelines. By following implementation of specialty-specific, risk-adjusted VTE order sets, compliance increased to 98%. In the year before VTE order-set implementation, the number of VTEs per admission was 49 per 1000. By following implementation, the number of VTEs steadily decreased each year to 8 per 1000 in 2007 (χ(2) = 14.985; P = .0001).

CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a standardized VTE risk assessment tool and prophylaxis order set resulted in a substantial improvement in compliance with ACCP guidelines for VTE prophylaxis and was associated with a 6-fold reduction in the number of symptomatic VTEs in a hospital-based rehabilitation unit.

PM R. 2011 Dec;3(12):1111-1115.e1
Authors: Mayer RS, Streiff MB, Hobson DB, Halpert DE, Berenholtz SM
Read Full Article

Search