Risk Of Venous Thromboembolism In Medical Patients Research Articles

Role of ambulation to prevent venous thromboembolism in medical patients: where do we stand?

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) encompasses the spectrum of manifestations of deep venous thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism and is a common, serious, and preventable complication in hospitalized patients. Although immobility plays an important role in determining VTE risk in medical patients, no clear and uniform criteria exist to guide clinicians in assessing immobility. The variation in the descriptions that do exist makes it difficult to interpret and compare the results of randomized clinical trials with respect to the influence of different levels of immobility on the magnitude of VTE risk and the role that early ambulation as an isolated factor plays in prevention of such events. Understanding these limitations is a prerequisite for the proper use and interpretation of VTE risk assessment tools and for indicating the best strategy for preventing venous thrombosis in hospitalized medical patients. The objective of this study was to review the main evidence reported in the literature on the role of ambulation in prevention of VTE.

Extended VTE Prophylaxis in Acutely Ill Medical Patients: Don't Try This at Home

Patients admitted to the hospital with acute medical conditions have excess risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE), and medical patients at moderate-to-high risk benefit from pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis (JW Gen Med Mar 1 2012). Some evidence suggests that VTE risk in medical patients extends beyond their hospital stay. More than 8000 patients (age, ≥40) in 51 countries who were …

Definition of immobility in studies of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients: A systematic review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common, serious and preventable complication in hospitalized patients. Thromboprophylaxis in medical patients is safe, effective, and cost saving, but remains underutilized. Although immobility plays an important role in determining VTE risk in medical patients, no clear criteria exist to guide clinicians in assessing immobility when making decisions about thromboprophylaxis. A systematic review was conducted to determine how immobility is defined and operationalized in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of thromboprophylaxis in medical inpatients. PubMed database was searched until September 2008 for RCTs of thromboprophylaxis in medical patients. Articles retrieved were further hand-searched to identify additional RCTs. Definitions of "immobility" were assessed. Twenty-one RCTs were retrieved, 18 were retained and 17 of these defined, to varying degrees, "immobility." Studies used several definition criteria, including the patient's degree of activity (14 studies), time spent immobile or mobile (13 studies), distance walked (4 studies) and underlying reason for immobility (4 studies); 14 studies used a combination of criteria. Definitions were clearly operationalized in 15 studies. The concept of "immobility" was utilized in study introductions (4 studies), inclusion/exclusion criteria (16 studies), as a stratification variable before randomization (1 study), in ongoing patient assessment (1 study), in treatment decisions (5 studies), as part of the study intervention (2 studies), as standard of care (2 studies), and in the results, discussion or conclusions (12 studies). There is a marked lack of consistency in how the concept of immobility is defined and utilized in RCTs of thromboprophylaxis in medical inpatients. This circumstance may contribute to the underutilization of thromboprophylaxis in clinical practice with medical inpatients.

Identification of Medical Patients Who Should Receive Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis.

Introduction Despite various medical illnesses/conditions and patient-related factors known to increase venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk in medical patients, there is no worldwide consensus regarding which of these patients should receive VTE prophylaxis. As a result, many medical patients remain at risk from this potentially fatal disease. Our objective was to develop a simple risk assessment model (RAM) that could be used at the bedside to identify medical patients who should receive prophylaxis.Methods Acute medical illnesses/conditions and risk factors were included in the RAM if there was strong evidence from prospective clinical studies to show that they significantly increase VTE risk in medical patients, or VTE prophylaxis was beneficial in these cases. If strong evidence was not available, the illness/condition or factor was only included if there was consensus from the authors that VTE prophylaxis is beneficial for these patients.Results Table 1 shows acute medical illnesses/conditions and factors associated with significant VTE risk that are included in the RAM. If a medical patient is >40 years old with an acute medical illness and reduced mobility and has one of the illnesses/conditions or factors shown in Table 1, the RAM recommends prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH: enoxaparin 40 mg o.d. or dalteparin 5000 IU o.d.) or unfractionated heparin (5000 IU q8h). LMWH is preferred due to a better safety profile. If pharmacologic prophylaxis is contraindicated, mechanical prophylaxis is recommended.Conclusion Acute medical illnesses/conditions and patient-related factors that increase the risk for VTE in medical patients have been identified and used to develop a novel RAM. The RAM is evidence-based wherever possible, and can be easily revised as new evidence becomes available. The RAM is simple in design, and can assist physicians to assess whether VTE prophylaxis is warranted in an individual medical patient.Table 1. Factors that increase the risk of VTE in medical patientsAcute medical illnesses/conditions RiskfactorsEvidence-based: Acute MI, acute heart failure (NYHA III/IV), active cancer requiring therapy, severe infection/sepsis, respiratory disease (respiratory failure with/without mechanical ventilation, exacerbation of chronic respiratory disease), rheumatic disease (including acute arthritis of lower extremities, and vertebral compression), ischemic stroke*, paraplegia Consensus view only: Inflammatory disorder with immobility, inflammatory bowel diseaseEvidence-based: History of VTE, history of malignancy, concurrent acute infectious disease, age >75 years Consensus-based from strong evidence in other settings: Prolonged immobility, age >60 years, varicose veins, obesity, hormone therapy, pregnancy/postpartum, nephrotic syndrome, dehydration, thrombophilia, thrombocytosis*Note: The risk of hemorrhagic transformation should be assessed before giving VTE prophylaxis.