ArticleChest2014
Rethinking guidelines for VTE risk among nursing home residents: a population-based study merging medical record detail with standardized nursing home assessments.
Article in Chest, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Estimated causal effects of common respiratory infections on cardiovascular risk: a meta-analysis.Open heart · 2023Pooled it
- Risk factors for pulmonary embolism in lung cancer patients with lower limb deep venous thrombosis: a case-control study.Translational lung cancer research · 2023Article
- A known unknown? Pharmacological prevention of venous thromboembolism in nursing home residents.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2021Article
- Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Incidence and VTE-Associated Survival among Olmsted County Residents of Local Nursing Homes.Thrombosis and haemostasis · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNursing home (NH) residents are at increased risk for both VTE and bleeding from pharmacologic prophylaxis. Construction of prophylaxis guidelines is hampered by NH-specific limitations with VTE case identification and characterization of risk. We addressed these limitations by merging detailed provider-linked Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP) medical records with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Minimum Data Set (MDS) NH assessments.
methodsThis population-based nested case-control study identified all Olmsted County, Minnesota, residents with first-lifetime VTE October 1, 1998, through December 31, 2005, while a resident of an NH (N = 91) and one to two age-, sex-, and calendar year-matched NH non-VTE control subjects. For each NH case without hospitalization 3 months before VTE (n = 23), we additionally identified three to four nonhospitalized NH control subjects. REP and MDS records were reviewed before index date (VTE date for cases; respective REP encounter date for control subjects) for numerous characteristics previously associated with VTE in non-NH populations. Data were modeled using conditional logistic regression.
resultsThe multivariate model consisting of all cases and control subjects identified only three characteristics independently associated with VTE: respiratory infection vs no infection (OR, 5.9; 95% CI, 2.6-13.1), extensive or total assistance with walking in room (5.6, 2.5-12.6), and general surgery (3.3, 1.0-10.8). In analyses limited to nonhospitalized cases and control subjects, only nonrespiratory infection vs no infection was independently associated with VTE (8.8, 2.7-29.2).
conclusionsContrary to previous assumptions, most VTE risk factors identified in non-NH populations do not apply to the NH population. NH residents with infection, substantial mobility limitations, or recent general surgery should be considered potential candidates for VTE prophylaxis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.