Literature DB >> 20196708

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in the critically ill: a point prevalence survey of current practice in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units.

Megan S Robertson1, Alistair D Nichol, Alisa M Higgins, Michael J Bailey, Jeffrey J Presneill, D James Cooper, Steven A Webb, Colin McArthur, Christopher M MacIsaac.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients are at high risk of morbidity and mortality caused by venous thromboembolism (VTE). In addition to premorbid predisposing conditions, critically ill patients may be exposed to prolonged immobility, invasive intravascular catheters and frequent operative procedures, and further may have contraindications to pharmaceutical prophylactic measures designed to attenuate VTE risk. There are limited data describing current VTE prophylaxis regimens in Australia and New Zealand.
OBJECTIVE: To document current Australian and New Zealand management of VTE prophylaxis in a large mixed cohort of critically ill patients.
DESIGN: Prospective, multicentre point prevalence survey endorsed by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group (ANZICS CTG).
SETTING: 30 public hospital ICUs in Australia and New Zealand surveyed on Wednesday 9 May 2007.
METHODS: For all patients in each ICU on the study day, demographic data, admission diagnosis and information on VTE prophylaxis were prospectively collected.
RESULTS: 502 patients were included in the survey, and 431 of these (86%) received VTE prophylaxis. Of these, 64% (276/431) received pharmacological prophylaxis and 80% (345/431) received mechanical prophylaxis, with 44% (190/431) receiving both. Of those receiving pharmacological prophylaxis, unfractionated heparin was used in 74%, and enoxaparin (low molecular weight heparin) in 23%. Contraindications to pharmacological prophylaxis were reported in 122 patients. Overall, pharmacological prophylaxis was administered to 87% of potentially suitable patients.
CONCLUSIONS: We observed a high prevalence of VTE prophylaxis, with many critically ill patients receiving two or more modalities of prophylaxis. These results show that the potential risk of VTE in critically ill patients is recognised in Australia and New Zealand, and strategies to mitigate this serious complication are widely implemented.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20196708

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Resusc        ISSN: 1441-2772            Impact factor:   2.159


  4 in total

1.  Intensive care unit capacity strain and adherence to prophylaxis guidelines.

Authors:  Gary E Weissman; Nicole B Gabler; Sydney E S Brown; Scott D Halpern
Journal:  J Crit Care       Date:  2015-08-22       Impact factor: 3.425

2.  PROF-ETEV study: prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic disease in critical care units in Spain.

Authors:  Pablo García-Olivares; Jose Eugenio Guerrero; Pedro Galdos; Demetrio Carriedo; Francisco Murillo; Antonio Rivera
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-08-20       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Current prevention practice for venous thromboembolism in Japanese intensive care units.

Authors:  Takeshi Yamamoto; Mashio Nakamura; Masayuki Kuroiwa; Keiji Tanaka
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 2.078

4.  Prophylaxis and Incidence of Symptomatic Deep Vein Thrombosis in Indian Patients with Sepsis: DETECT-Deep Vein Thrombosis Registry.

Authors:  Nagarajan Ramakrishnan
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-11
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.