Risk stratification for venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients in a developing country: A prospective study

Department of Hematology-Oncology and Quality Improvement Office, Jordan University Hospital, Amman, Jordan.
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis (Impact Factor: 2.17). 12/2008; 28(3):309-13. DOI: 10.1007/s11239-008-0291-1
Source: PubMed


Venous Thrombo-Embolism (VTE) is a serious complication in hospitalized patients but can be preventable. This prospective study addresses risk factors assessment and the use of heparin in this population. About 2,496 non pediatric patients were admitted to Jordan University Hospital between June 12, 2007 and July 19, 2007. A random sample of 624 patients consisting of every fourth admission was chosen. The stratification of risk factors was assessed using Caprini model and the ACCP score. The mean age of the patients (229 males and 395 females) was 45.34 +/- 18.3 years. More than 80% of the admitted patients were considered at high risk for VTE but heparin was used in only 26% of the patients. The majority of our patients constitute a high-risk population. Implementation of strategies including educational sessions and risk stratification guidelines can reduce the incidence, morbidity, and mortality of VTE especially in developing countries.

9 Reads
  • Source
    • "Despite development of various Practice guidelines for prevention of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE), it remains underused in most countries [5,6]. Improving clinician's compliance with the guidelines is a complex task and partly rest on improving thrombotic risk-assessment methods [7]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Clinical practice guidelines and Risk Assessment Models (RAMs) are some useful tools to bring medical evidences into our daily clinical practice. Despite the improvement over the time, they still have some shortcomings. One of these shortcomings is the arbitrary cutoffs used in these tools to facilitate the decision making process. This problem is to some extent due to the "Black or White" approach of modern medicine in making the decisions, whilst in the real world and our daily practice we used mostly an uncertain approach, which is called recently as "Fuzzy" thinking approach. The authors of this article believe that the fuzzy type of thinking may resolve the above mentioned shortcomings of clinical practice guideline or risk assessment models and they tried to discuss about this using an example about Venous Thromboembolism related guidelines and RAMs.
    BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 10/2011; 11(1):63. DOI:10.1186/1472-6947-11-63 · 1.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "If such trials yield positive results, they may be especially useful in developing countries, where there is a significant and increasing risk of DVT and VTE in medically ill patients but only a minority receives anticoagulant prophylaxis [80,81]. Practitioners in these countries recognize the economic and other difficulties of providing anticoagulants for all patients for whom they are not contraindicated and recommend careful risk stratification and education [80,82]. Education could include dietary advice. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Both prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE: deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary emboli (PE)) with anticoagulants are associated with significant risks of major and fatal hemorrhage. Anticoagulation treatment of VTE has been the standard of care in the USA since before 1962 when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration began requiring randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) showing efficacy, so efficacy trials were never required for FDA approval. In clinical trials of 'high VTE risk' surgical patients before the 1980s, anticoagulant prophylaxis was clearly beneficial (fatal pulmonary emboli (FPE) without anticoagulants = 0.99%, FPE with anticoagulants = 0.31%). However, observational studies and RCTs of 'high VTE risk' surgical patients from the 1980s until 2010 show that FPE deaths without anticoagulants are about one-fourth the rate that occurs during prophylaxis with anticoagulants (FPE without anticoagulants = 0.023%, FPE while receiving anticoagulant prophylaxis = 0.10%). Additionally, an FPE rate of about 0.012% (35/28,400) in patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulants can be attributed to 'rebound hypercoagulation' in the two months after stopping anticoagulants. Alternatives to anticoagulant prophylaxis should be explored. The literature concerning dietary influences on VTE incidence was reviewed. Hypotheses concerning the etiology of VTE were critiqued in relationship to the rationale for dietary versus anticoagulant approaches to prophylaxis and treatment.Epidemiological evidence suggests that a diet with ample fruits and vegetables and little meat may substantially reduce the risk of VTE; vegetarian, vegan, or Mediterranean diets favorably affect serum markers of hemostasis and inflammation. The valve cusp hypoxia hypothesis of DVT/VTE etiology is consistent with the development of VTE being affected directly or indirectly by diet. However, it is less consistent with the rationale of using anticoagulants as VTE prophylaxis. For both prophylaxis and treatment of VTE, we propose RCTs comparing standard anticoagulation with low VTE risk diets, and we discuss the statistical considerations for an example of such a trial. Because of (a) the risks of biochemical anticoagulation as anti-VTE prophylaxis or treatment, (b) the lack of placebo-controlled efficacy data supporting anticoagulant treatment of VTE, (c) dramatically reduced hospital-acquired FPE incidence in surgical patients without anticoagulant prophylaxis from 1980 - 2010 relative to the 1960s and 1970s, and (d) evidence that VTE incidence and outcomes may be influenced by diet, randomized controlled non-inferiority clinical trials are proposed to compare standard anticoagulant treatment with potentially low VTE risk diets. We call upon the U. S. National Institutes of Health and the U.K. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence to design and fund those trials.
    Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling 08/2010; 7(1):31. DOI:10.1186/1742-4682-7-31 · 0.95 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major public health issue that is frequently underestimated. The primary objective of this multinational survey was to identify patients at risk for VTE, and to define the rate of patients receiving appropriate prophylaxis in the Middle Eastern region. Standardized case report forms were filled by trained individuals on one predefined day in selected hospitals. Data were then entered and analyzed by independent biostatisticians. Risk was categorized according to American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines, 2004. Logistic regressions were carried out to assess factors that determined VTE prophylaxis. 845 (37%) medical and 1421 (63%) surgical patients were eligible for the study. Patients were at low (4.2%), moderate (51.7%), high (9%) and very high risk (35.2%) for VTE. Any VTE prevention was given in 17.9, 41.7, 60.6 and 66.9% of respective risk categories, while ACCP guidelines were applied in 86.3, 41.1, 48.3 and 24.5% of these categories. Surgical patient type, immobility on admission, and contraceptive use were the most important drivers of VTE prophylaxis in those who were eligible to it (OR ≥ 2). Surgical patient type, immobility during hospitalization, existence of a VTE protocol and chronic heart failure were the most important drivers for VTE prophylaxis application in patients who were not eligible for it (OR ≥ 3). A concordance κ value of 0.16 was found between eligibility for VTE prophylaxis on one hand and its application in practice (P < 0.001). Risk factors for VTE and eligibility for VTE prophylaxis are common, but VTE prophylaxis and guidelines application are low.
    Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 01/2011; 31(1):47-56. DOI:10.1007/s11239-010-0492-2 · 2.17 Impact Factor
Show more