Literature DB >> 21962315

Derivation and validation of a simple model to identify venous thromboembolism risk in medical patients.

Scott C Woller1, Scott M Stevens, Jason P Jones, James F Lloyd, R Scott Evans, Valerie T Aston, C Gregory Elliott.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fewer than half of eligible hospitalized medical patients receive appropriate venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. One reason for this low rate is the complexity of existing risk assessment models. A simple set of easily identifiable risk factors that are highly predictive of VTE among hospitalized medical patients may enhance appropriate thromboprophylaxis.
METHODS: Electronic medical record interrogation was performed to identify medical admissions from January 1, 2000-December 31, 2007 (n=143,000), and those patients with objectively confirmed VTE during hospitalization or within 90 days following discharge. Putative risk factors most predictive of VTE were identified, and a risk assessment model (RAM) was derived; 46,000 medicine admissions from January 1, 2008-December 31, 2009 served as a validation cohort to test the predictive ability of the RAM. The newly derived RAM was compared with a published VTE assessment tool (Kucher Score).
RESULTS: Four risk factors: previous VTE; an order for bed rest; peripherally inserted central venous catheterization line; and a cancer diagnosis, were the minimal set most predictive of hospital-associated VTE (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]=0.874; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.869-0.880). These risk factors upon validation in a separate population (validation cohort) retained an AUC=0.843; 95% CI, 0.833-0.852. The ability of the 4-element RAM to identify patients at risk of developing VTE within 90 days was superior to the Kucher Score.
CONCLUSIONS: The 4-element RAM identified in this study may be used to identify patients at risk for VTE and improve rates of thromboprophylaxis. This simple and accurate RAM is an alternative to more complicated published VTE risk assessment tools that currently exist.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21962315     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.06.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  22 in total

Review 1.  Opportunities and challenges in developing risk prediction models with electronic health records data: a systematic review.

Authors:  Benjamin A Goldstein; Ann Marie Navar; Michael J Pencina; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 2.  A systematic review of mobility/immobility in thromboembolism risk assessment models for hospitalized patients.

Authors:  Fan Ye; Carolyn Stalvey; Matheen A Khuddus; David E Winchester; Hale Z Toklu; Joseph J Mazza; Steven H Yale
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 3.  Risk-assessment models for predicting venous thromboembolism among hospitalized non-surgical patients: a systematic review.

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

Review 4.  Epidemiology of venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  John A Heit
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  Risk-assessment models for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients: an overview of systematic reviews.

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

6.  A decision model to estimate a risk threshold for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients.

Authors:  P Le; K A Martinez; M A Pappas; M B Rothberg
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2017-05-03       Impact factor: 5.824

Review 7.  Variation in Definitions of Immobility in Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis Clinical Trials in Medical Inpatients: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Fan Ye; Lauren N Bell; Joseph Mazza; Arthur Lee; Steven H Yale
Journal:  Clin Appl Thromb Hemost       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.389

Review 8.  Cancer-related coagulopathy (Trousseau's syndrome): review of the literature and experience of a single center of internal medicine.

Authors:  Franco Dammacco; Angelo Vacca; Pasquale Procaccio; Roberto Ria; Ilaria Marech; Vito Racanelli
Journal:  Clin Exp Med       Date:  2013-03-02       Impact factor: 3.984

9.  Derivation of a risk assessment model for hospital-acquired venous thrombosis: the NAVAL score.

Authors:  Marcos de Bastos; Sandhi M Barreto; Jackson S Caiafa; Tânia Boguchi; José Luiz Padilha Silva; Suely M Rezende
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 2.300

10.  Risk models for VTE and bleeding in medical inpatients: systematic identification and expert assessment.

Authors:  Andrea J Darzi; Samer G Karam; Frederick A Spencer; Alex C Spyropoulos; Lawrence Mbuagbaw; Scott C Woller; Neil A Zakai; Michael B Streiff; Michael K Gould; Mary Cushman; Rana Charide; Itziar Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta; Federico Germini; Marta Rigoni; Arnav Agarwal; Rami Z Morsi; Elie A Akl; Alfonso Iorio; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2020-06-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.