Abstract
BackgroundMany clinical practice guidelines, while recommending mechanical thromboprophylaxis after surgery, have raised concerns that discomfort may result in nonadherence. We therefore addressed adherence to mechanical thromboprophylaxis after surgery. MethodsWe searched MEDLINE from January 1, 2000 to May 21, 2015 for English-language observational studies that assessed patient adherence to mechanical thromboprophylaxis after surgery. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate average adherence rates. ResultsWe identified 8 studies (7 for compression devices, 1 for stockings) with median follow up time of 3days. The pooled estimate of adherence for compression devices was 75% (median 78%, range 40%-89%). Studies with shorter follow-up (≤3days, n=4, pooled adherence 75%) and longer follow-up (>3days, n=3, pooled adherence 75%) reported similar adherence (p=0.99). The studies varied in definitions of adherence, frequency of assessment, length of follow-up and completeness of reporting. No study followed patients after discharge. ConclusionsUp to one fourth of patients are nonadherent to mechanical thromboprophylaxis while hospitalized. Clinicians considering the relative merits of mechanical versus pharmacologic prophylaxis should address the issue of adherence. Strategies to improve adherence merit investigation.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
