PURPOSE: To systematically review the effects of early ambulation on development of pulmonary embolism (PE) and progression or development of a new thrombus in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT). METHODS: Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to June 2008. Study quality was appraised using the Jadad and PEDro scales. Meta-analyses were reported as relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Four randomized trials were accepted. For development of a PE, the pooled relative risks for ambulation and compression versus bed rest and compression (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.34-1.19) and for ambulation and compression versus bed rest alone (RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 0.57-3.29) were not significant. For progression of an existing thrombus or development of a new thrombus, the independent relative risks for ambulation and compression versus bed rest and compression (RR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.13-1.14) and for ambulation and compression versus bed rest alone (RR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.20-1.57) were also not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Given the clinical benefits of mobility, and because there was no significant difference between ambulation and bed rest for risk of developing a PE or development and progression of a new DVT in any of the studies, clinicians should be confident in prescribing ambulation in this population.
PURPOSE: To systematically review the effects of early ambulation on development of pulmonary embolism (PE) and progression or development of a new thrombus in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT). METHODS: Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to June 2008. Study quality was appraised using the Jadad and PEDro scales. Meta-analyses were reported as relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Four randomized trials were accepted. For development of a PE, the pooled relative risks for ambulation and compression versus bed rest and compression (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.34-1.19) and for ambulation and compression versus bed rest alone (RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 0.57-3.29) were not significant. For progression of an existing thrombus or development of a new thrombus, the independent relative risks for ambulation and compression versus bed rest and compression (RR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.13-1.14) and for ambulation and compression versus bed rest alone (RR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.20-1.57) were also not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Given the clinical benefits of mobility, and because there was no significant difference between ambulation and bed rest for risk of developing a PE or development and progression of a new DVT in any of the studies, clinicians should be confident in prescribing ambulation in this population.
Authors: Clive Kearon; Susan R Kahn; Giancarlo Agnelli; Samuel Goldhaber; Gary E Raskob; Anthony J Comerota Journal: Chest Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 9.410