Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16995891›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2006

Brief report: graduated compression stocking thromboprophylaxis for elderly inpatients: a propensity analysis.

Jose Labarere, Jean-Luc Bosson, Marie-Antoinette Sevestre, Anne-Sophie Delmas, Stéphane Dupas, Marie-Hélène Thenault, Annie Legagneux, Gudrun Boge, Béatrice Terriat, Gilles Pernod and 1 more

Abstract readEvaluation StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Jose LabarereThEMAS TIMC-IMAG UMR CNRS 5525 UJF, Grenoble, France. JLabarere@chu-grenoble.fr
Jean-Luc Bosson
Marie-Antoinette Sevestre
Anne-Sophie Delmas
Stéphane Dupas
Marie-Hélène Thenault
Annie Legagneux
Gudrun Boge
Béatrice Terriat
Gilles Pernod
Association pour la Promotion de l'Angiologie Hospitalière
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Amiens-Picardie · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRCHU Dijon Bourgogne · FRGroupe Hospitalier du Havre · FRInserm · FRUniversité Joseph Fourier · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGraduated compression stockings (GCS) are often used for deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis in nonsurgical patients, although evidence on their effectiveness is lacking in this setting.

objectiveTo determine whether prophylaxis with GCS is associated with a decrease in the rate of deep vein thrombosis in nonsurgical elderly patients.

methodsUsing original data from 2 multicenter nonrandomized studies, we performed multivariable and propensity score analyses to determine whether prophylaxis with GCS reduced the rate of deep vein thrombosis among 1,310 postacute care patients 65 years or older. The primary outcome was proximal deep vein thrombosis detected by routine compression ultrasonography performed by registered vascular physicians.

resultsProximal deep vein thrombosis was found in 5.7% (21/371) of the GCS users and in 5.2% (49/939) of the GCS nonusers (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-1.84). Although adjusting for propensity score eliminated all differences in baseline characteristics between users and nonusers, the OR for proximal deep vein thrombosis associated with GCS remained nonsignificant in propensity-stratified (adjusted OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.59-2.10) and propensity-matched (conditional OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.42-2.02) analysis. Similar figures were observed for distal and any deep vein thrombosis. The rates of deep vein thrombosis did not differ according to the length of stockings.

conclusionsProphylaxis with GCS is not associated with a lower rate of deep vein thrombosis in nonsurgical elderly patients in routine practice. Randomized studies are needed to assess the efficacy of GCS when properly used in this setting.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overEquipment DesignFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMulticenter Studies as TopicMultivariate AnalysisOdds RatioStockings, CompressionTreatment FailureVenous Thrombosis

Identifiers

PMID16995891
PMCPMC1924758
OpenAlexW1723450255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.