ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2014
Improved venous thromboembolism prophylaxis by pharmacist-driven interventions in acutely ill medical patients in Belgium.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and economic outcomes of hospital pharmaceutical care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Evaluation of deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis use in a Northwest Ethiopian medical ward: an observational follow-up study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Polypharmacotherapy and blood products as risk factors for venous thromboembolism in postsurgical patients: a case-control study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2017Article
- Developing an Economic Case of Clinical Pharmacists' Interventions on Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Through Service Evaluation.Journal of research in pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundForty to 50 % of hospitalized patients with an acute medical illness have risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and it has been shown that VTE prophylaxis reduced the incidence of VTE events in these patients. However, a large multinational survey, the ENDORSE study, showed that only 37 % of medical patients with VTE risk factors actually received VTE prophylaxis.
objectiveTo evaluate the impact over time of pharmacist-driven interventions aiming at increasing the appropriate use of VTE prophylaxis in acutely ill medical hospitalized patients.
settingA Belgian urban academic hospital.
methodFirst, during 1 month, medical and nurse reports of all hospitalized medical patients were reviewed to evaluate the proportion of patients who were on prophylaxis according to clinical practice guidelines. Second, interventions were conducted and included unit-specific physician and nurse education, diffusion of educational tools summarizing VTE prophylaxis guidelines, and reminders. Third, the impact of the interventions on the proportion of patients receiving VTE prophylaxis according to clinical practice guidelines was evaluated after 3 months and 1 year.
main outcome measureProportion of hospitalized medical patients receiving VTE prophylaxis according to clinical practice guidelines.
resultsThe baseline evaluation showed that 36 % (26/72) of the patients at risk of VTE received VTE prophylaxis according to clinical practice guidelines. Three months and one year after the interventions, 68 % (55/81), and 72 % (58/81) of the patients at risk of VTE received VTE prophylaxis according to clinical practice guidelines. Among patients not at risk of VTE, 15 % (21/141), 8 % (24/290), and 8 % (27/330) respectively at baseline evaluation, 3 months and 1 year after the interventions, received VTE prophylaxis.
conclusionPharmacist-driven interventions improved the proportion of acutely ill medical patients receiving VTE prophylaxis according to clinical practice guidelines and the benefit of the interventions was maintained after 1 year.
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.