Current practice of thromboprophylaxis in the burn population: A survey study of 84 US burn centers

Abstract

While there is limited prospective data on the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the burn population, there are no prospective studies on the efficacy and safety of VTE prophylaxis in these patients. Despite lack of such data, we hypothesized that most burn centers practice some form of prophylaxis. Eighty-four US burn centers were contacted regarding their modality of VTE prophylaxis, if any. Of the 84 US burn centers, 71 were enrolled in this survey. 76.1% centers reported routine VTE prophylaxis. Modalities included sequential compression device (SCD) (33), subcutaneous heparin (31), enoxaparin (13), dalteparin (3), and intravenous heparin infusion (1). Twenty-one reported combined modalities of SCD and subcutaneous heparin (19), SCD and enoxaparin (1), or SCD and dalteparin (1). Survey results underscore the need to definitively establish risk factors for VTE in the burn population and to prospectively define an evidence-based standard of care in prophylaxis for those patients.