Haematologica EWOG-MDS website
HOME HELP FEEDBACK TABLE OF CONTENTS ARCHIVE SUBSCRIPTIONS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Samama, M.
Right arrow Articles by Kahan, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Samama, M.
Right arrow Articles by Kahan, J.
Haematologica, Vol 91, Issue 1, 64-70
Copyright © 2006 by Ferrata Storti Foundation


Journal Article

An electronic tool for venous thromboembolism prevention in medical and surgical patients

MM Samama, OE Dahl, P Mismetti, DJ Quinlan, N Rosencher, M Cornelis, H de Vries, I van Beusekom, and JP Kahan

Hotel-Dieu, Paris, France. florence.roux@htd.ap-hop-paris.fr

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a complex disorder influenced by numerous risk factors, and occurs frequently in at-risk hospitalized patients. Because appropriate prevention with thromboprophylaxis is underused, we wanted to create an electronic tool to provide a simple risk assessment and suggest appropriate prophylaxis. DESIGN AND METHODS: To develop the risk matrix, iterative rating of odds ratios was performed for 60 predisposing VTE risk factors, using analytical methods that account for multiple risk factors in a single patient and their non-independence. For exposing risk factors, a single score was assigned to each set of factors, both medical (25 items) and surgical conditions (144 items). A CART regression model was used to integrate the risk scales into a 4-level measure of overall risk. The validity of the level of risk and the appropriateness of 11 different prophylactic approaches was assessed using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method and validated by expert opinion ratings (n=1998) on sample case scenarios (n=108). RESULTS: Correlation between the level of risk calculated by the risk matrix and that offered by expert opinion for individual surgical and medical clinical cases was high (65% and 70%, respectively). The matrix over-estimated the level of risk, compared with that offered by expert opinion, in 28% and 20% of surgical and medical cases, respectively, but the appropriate prophylaxis suggested was no different. Between-expert agreement on the appropriateness of the prophylaxis recommendations was high (90-94% of indications). INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: This computer-based electronic tool for individualized assessment of venous thromboembolic risk successfully identified both the perceived risk of thrombosis and the appropriate prophylactic approach for medical and surgical patients.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ChestHome page
W. H. Geerts, D. Bergqvist, G. F. Pineo, J. A. Heit, C. M. Samama, M. R. Lassen, and C. W. Colwell
Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition)
Chest, June 1, 2008; 133(6_suppl): 381S - 453S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK TABLE OF CONTENTS ARCHIVE SUBSCRIPTIONS
Copyright © 2006 by the Ferrata Storti Foundation.