BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a complex disorder influenced by numerous risk factors, and occurs frequently in at-risk hospitalized patients. Because appropriate prevention with thromboprophylaxis is underused, we wanted to create an electronic tool to provide a simple risk assessment and suggest appropriate prophylaxis. DESIGN AND METHODS: To develop the risk matrix, iterative rating of odds ratios was performed for 60 predisposing VTE risk factors, using analytical methods that account for multiple risk factors in a single patient and their non-independence. For exposing risk factors, a single score was assigned to each set of factors, both medical (25 items) and surgical conditions (144 items). A CART regression model was used to integrate the risk scales into a 4-level measure of overall risk. The validity of the level of risk and the appropriateness of 11 different prophylactic approaches was assessed using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method and validated by expert opinion ratings (n=1998) on sample case scenarios (n=108). RESULTS: Correlation between the level of risk calculated by the risk matrix and that offered by expert opinion for individual surgical and medical clinical cases was high (65% and 70%, respectively). The matrix over-estimated the level of risk, compared with that offered by expert opinion, in 28% and 20% of surgical and medical cases, respectively, but the appropriate prophylaxis suggested was no different. Between-expert agreement on the appropriateness of the prophylaxis recommendations was high (90-94% of indications). INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: This computer-based electronic tool for individualized assessment of venous thromboembolic risk successfully identified both the perceived risk of thrombosis and the appropriate prophylactic approach for medical and surgical patients.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a complex disorder influenced by numerous risk factors, and occurs frequently in at-risk hospitalized patients. Because appropriate prevention with thromboprophylaxis is underused, we wanted to create an electronic tool to provide a simple risk assessment and suggest appropriate prophylaxis. DESIGN AND METHODS: To develop the risk matrix, iterative rating of odds ratios was performed for 60 predisposing VTE risk factors, using analytical methods that account for multiple risk factors in a single patient and their non-independence. For exposing risk factors, a single score was assigned to each set of factors, both medical (25 items) and surgical conditions (144 items). A CART regression model was used to integrate the risk scales into a 4-level measure of overall risk. The validity of the level of risk and the appropriateness of 11 different prophylactic approaches was assessed using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method and validated by expert opinion ratings (n=1998) on sample case scenarios (n=108). RESULTS: Correlation between the level of risk calculated by the risk matrix and that offered by expert opinion for individual surgical and medical clinical cases was high (65% and 70%, respectively). The matrix over-estimated the level of risk, compared with that offered by expert opinion, in 28% and 20% of surgical and medical cases, respectively, but the appropriate prophylaxis suggested was no different. Between-expert agreement on the appropriateness of the prophylaxis recommendations was high (90-94% of indications). INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: This computer-based electronic tool for individualized assessment of venous thromboembolic risk successfully identified both the perceived risk of thrombosis and the appropriate prophylactic approach for medical and surgical patients.
Authors: Wei Huang; Frederick A Anderson; Frederick A Spencer; Alexander Gallus; Robert J Goldberg Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Andrea J Darzi; Allen B Repp; Frederick A Spencer; Rami Z Morsi; Rana Charide; Itziar Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta; Kenneth A Bauer; Allison E Burnett; Mary Cushman; Francesco Dentali; Susan R Kahn; Suely M Rezende; Neil A Zakai; Arnav Agarwal; Samer G Karam; Tamara Lotfi; Wojtek Wiercioch; Reem Waziry; Alfonso Iorio; Elie A Akl; Holger J Schünemann Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2020-10-13
Authors: M Chavez-MacGregor; H Zhao; M Kroll; S Fang; N Zhang; G N Hortobagyi; T A Buchholz; Y-C Shih; S H Giordano Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-03-10 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Aristoteles Giagounidis; Pierre Fenaux; Ghulam J Mufti; Petra Muus; Uwe Platzbecker; Guillermo Sanz; Larry Cripe; Marie Von Lilienfeld-Toal; Richard A Wells Journal: Ann Hematol Date: 2008-02-12 Impact factor: 3.673