Ian H Jenkins1, Richard H White2, Alpesh N Amin3, Nasim Afsarmanesh4, Andrew D Auerbach5, Raman Khanna5, Gregory A Maynard6. 1. Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego Health System, San Diego, California. 2. Department of Medicine, University of California Davis, Davis, California. 3. Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California. 4. Department of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles Health, Los Angeles, California. 5. Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 6. University of California Davis Medical Center, Davis, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Almost 700 patients suffered from hospital-associated venous thromboembolism (HA-VTE) across 5 University of California hospitals in calendar year 2011. OBJECTIVE: Optimize venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis (VTEP) in adult medical/surgical inpatients and reduce HA-VTE by at least 20% within 3 years. DESIGN: Prospective, unblinded, open-intervention study with historical controls. SETTING: Five independent but cooperating academic hospitals. PATIENTS: All adult medical and surgical inpatients with stays ≥3 days. The baseline year was 2011, 2012 to 2014 were intervention years, and year 2014 was the mature comparison period. VTEP adequacy was assessed with structured chart review of 45 patients per month at each site via random selection beginning partway through the study. HA-VTE was identified by discharge coding, capturing patients readmitted within 30 days of prior VTE-free admit and VTE occurring during index admission. Cases were stratified medical versus surgical and cancer or noncancer. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions included structured order sets with "3-bucket" risk-assessment, measure-vention, techniques to improve reliable administration of VTEP, and education. RESULTS: Adequate prophylaxis reached 89% by early 2014. The rate of HA-VTE fell from 0.90% in 2011 to 0.69% in 2014 (24% relative risk [RR] reduction; RR: 0.76, 95% confidence interval: 0.68-0.852), equivalent to averting 81 pulmonary emboli and 89 deep venous thrombi. VTE rates were highest in cancer and surgical patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital systems can reduce HA-VTE by implementing a bundle of active interventions including structured VTEP orders with embedded risk assessment and measure-vention. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:S22-S28.
BACKGROUND: Almost 700 patients suffered from hospital-associated venous thromboembolism (HA-VTE) across 5 University of California hospitals in calendar year 2011. OBJECTIVE: Optimize venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis (VTEP) in adult medical/surgical inpatients and reduce HA-VTE by at least 20% within 3 years. DESIGN: Prospective, unblinded, open-intervention study with historical controls. SETTING: Five independent but cooperating academic hospitals. PATIENTS: All adult medical and surgical inpatients with stays ≥3 days. The baseline year was 2011, 2012 to 2014 were intervention years, and year 2014 was the mature comparison period. VTEP adequacy was assessed with structured chart review of 45 patients per month at each site via random selection beginning partway through the study. HA-VTE was identified by discharge coding, capturing patients readmitted within 30 days of prior VTE-free admit and VTE occurring during index admission. Cases were stratified medical versus surgical and cancer or noncancer. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions included structured order sets with "3-bucket" risk-assessment, measure-vention, techniques to improve reliable administration of VTEP, and education. RESULTS: Adequate prophylaxis reached 89% by early 2014. The rate of HA-VTE fell from 0.90% in 2011 to 0.69% in 2014 (24% relative risk [RR] reduction; RR: 0.76, 95% confidence interval: 0.68-0.852), equivalent to averting 81 pulmonary emboli and 89 deep venous thrombi. VTE rates were highest in cancer and surgical patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital systems can reduce HA-VTE by implementing a bundle of active interventions including structured VTEP orders with embedded risk assessment and measure-vention. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:S22-S28.
Authors: Z Tazi Mezalek; C Nejjari; L Essadouni; M Samkaoui; K Serraj; W Ammouri; N Kanjaa; Z Belkhadir; B Housni; M Awab; M Faroudy; W Bono; S Kabbaj; M Akkaoui; M Barakat; R Rifai; H Charaf; A Aziz; Y Elachhab; A Azzouzi Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Melissa K Myers; Claire L Jansson-Knodell; Darrell R Schroeder; John G O'Meara; Sara L Bonnes; John T Ratelle Journal: J Multidiscip Healthc Date: 2018-09-18
Authors: Scott C Woller; Scott M Stevens; R Scott Evans; Daniel Wray; John Christensen; Valerie T Aston; Matthew Wayne; James F Lloyd; Emily L Wilson; C Gregory Elliott Journal: Res Pract Thromb Haemost Date: 2018-06-07