ArticleIrish journal of medical science2007
Risk-based evaluation of thromboprophylaxis among surgical inpatients: are low risk patients treated unnecessarily?
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in general surgery: guidelines differ and we still need local policies.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism is a common source of morbidity and mortality but a variety of preventative measures are available.
aimsTo audit the current practice of thromboprophylaxis and compare against published protocols.
methodsThree-hundred and seventy-six (376) surgical patients were surveyed prospectively. A Performa was completed recording the presence of up to 11 risk factors. A risk score was calculated and the use of specific thromboprophylatic measures identified.
resultsHeparin thromboprophylaxis was widely used, eight patients (who were on aspirin therapy) failed to receive any prophylaxis (risk factors 4-6). In addition there were 60 patients at low risk (risk score <2) received LMWH from which they were unlikely to benefit.
conclusionsThromboembolic prophylaxis is widely but unselectively applied. Adoption of a risk: benefit ratio approach should ensure those who would benefit from thromboprophylaxis are adequately treated while those in whom thromboprophylaxis is not indicated are spared unnecessary therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17554579What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.