ArticleBMJ open2014
Current practice of venous thromboembolism prevention in acute trusts: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chinese orthopaedic nurses' knowledge, attitude and venous thromboembolic prophylactic practices: A multicentric cross-sectional survey.Journal of clinical nursing · 2021Article
- Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in mental health in-patient services: a qualitative study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the current practice of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention in acute trusts.
designA qualitative research design was used to explore the perceived current practice of thromboprophylaxis, and knowledge and experience of VTE prevention. Data were collected via interviews with personnel from acute trusts and other relevant organisations and charities. Constant comparison was used to generate themes grounded in the data.
settingThe UK.
participants17 participants, sampled due to their expertise and knowledge in the field of VTE, were interviewed for the study.
resultsNo one felt directly responsible for VTE risk assessment and treatment in acute trusts. There were concerns whether any action takes place based on the risk assessment. Low levels of VTE knowledge existed throughout the system.
conclusionsOur study highlights the importance of continuous training to prevent VTE risk assessment being considered a tick box exercise and for clinicians to understand the significance of the procedure to ensure that VTE preventative measures are administered. It is essential that acute trust staff acknowledge that VTE prevention is the responsibility of everyone involved in a patient's care. Concerns remain around prophylaxis treatment, administration and contraindications.
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.