Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAnderson, Frederick A.
dc.contributor.authorWheeler, H. Brownell
dc.contributor.authorGoldberg, Robert J.
dc.contributor.authorHosmer, David W.
dc.contributor.authorForcier, Ann
dc.contributor.authorPatwardhan, Nilima A.
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:37.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T17:15:00Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T17:15:00Z
dc.date.issued1991-10-25
dc.date.submitted2010-05-27
dc.identifier.citationAnn Intern Med. 1991 Oct 15;115(8):591-5.
dc.identifier.issn0003-4819 (Linking)
dc.identifier.pmid1892330
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/47084
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: To determine the rate of use of prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in high-risk hospital patients. DESIGN: A retrospective medical record review. SETTING: A community-wide study in 16 short-stay hospitals in central Massachusetts. PATIENTS: A total of 2017 patients with multiple risk factors for venous thromboembolism. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: On the basis of age, length of hospitalization, and the presence of at least one additional major risk factor, 17% of 151,349 discharges (25,410 patients) were identified as being at high risk for venous thromboembolism. Eight percent of these discharges were randomly selected for medical record review. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism was received by 32% of these high-risk patients. Prophylaxis use among the 16 study hospitals varied widely, ranging from 9% to 56%, and was higher in teaching hospitals than in nonteaching hospitals (44% compared with 19%; P less than 0.001). One or more of the following methods of prophylaxis was used: low-dose heparin (78%), intermittent calf compression (13%), warfarin (12%), and inferior vena caval filter (3%). Use of prophylaxis increased with the number of risk factors identified (P less than 0.001). CONCLUSION: Prophylaxis for venous thromboemobolism is underused, particularly in nonteaching hospitals.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=1892330&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.annals.org/content/115/8/591.abstract
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectLogistic Models
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMassachusetts
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subject*Physician's Practice Patterns
dc.subjectPostoperative Complications
dc.subjectPulmonary Embolism
dc.subjectRetrospective Studies
dc.subjectRisk Factors
dc.subjectThrombophlebitis
dc.subjectBioinformatics
dc.subjectBiostatistics
dc.subjectEpidemiology
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.titlePhysician practices in the prevention of venous thromboembolism
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleAnnals of internal medicine
dc.source.volume115
dc.source.issue8
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/qhs_pp/235
dc.identifier.contextkey1332987
html.description.abstract<p>OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate of use of prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in high-risk hospital patients.</p> <p>DESIGN: A retrospective medical record review.</p> <p>SETTING: A community-wide study in 16 short-stay hospitals in central Massachusetts.</p> <p>PATIENTS: A total of 2017 patients with multiple risk factors for venous thromboembolism.</p> <p>MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: On the basis of age, length of hospitalization, and the presence of at least one additional major risk factor, 17% of 151,349 discharges (25,410 patients) were identified as being at high risk for venous thromboembolism. Eight percent of these discharges were randomly selected for medical record review. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism was received by 32% of these high-risk patients. Prophylaxis use among the 16 study hospitals varied widely, ranging from 9% to 56%, and was higher in teaching hospitals than in nonteaching hospitals (44% compared with 19%; P less than 0.001). One or more of the following methods of prophylaxis was used: low-dose heparin (78%), intermittent calf compression (13%), warfarin (12%), and inferior vena caval filter (3%). Use of prophylaxis increased with the number of risk factors identified (P less than 0.001).</p> <p>CONCLUSION: Prophylaxis for venous thromboemobolism is underused, particularly in nonteaching hospitals.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathqhs_pp/235
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine
dc.source.pages591-5


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record