Trial reportPloS one2016
Multifaceted Intervention to Prevent Venous Thromboembolism in Patients Hospitalized for Acute Medical Illness: A Multicenter Cluster-Randomized Trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01212393 (Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism Disease for Acutelly Ill Medical Patients Admitted to Hospital), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism Disease for Acutelly Ill Medical Patients Admitted to Hospital : Systematic Analysis of Thrombosis Risk Factors and Remember of Prevention Treatment Indications in Emergency Departments.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Interventions for implementation of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients at risk for venous thromboembolism.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- The effects of on-screen, point of care computer reminders on processes and outcomes of care.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009Pooled it
- Article
- Risk Assessment Models for Venous Thromboembolism in Medical Inpatients.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- System-Wide Thromboprophylaxis Interventions for Hospitalized Patients at Risk of Venous Thromboembolism: Focus on Cross-Platform Clinical Decision Support.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Risk stratification for hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism in medical patients (RISE): Protocol for a prospective cohort study.PloS one · 2022Article
- A multifaceted clinical decision support intervention to improve adherence to thromboprophylaxis guidelines.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2021Article
- Evaluation and management of thromboprophylaxis in Moroccan hospitals at national level: the Avail-MoNa study.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2018Article
- Prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in Internal Medicine Units: the RAMs issue.Internal and emergency medicine · 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
13 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMisuse of thromboprophylaxis may increase preventable complications for hospitalized medical patients.
objectivesTo assess the net clinical benefit of a multifaceted intervention in emergency wards (educational lectures, posters, pocket cards, computerized clinical decision support systems and, where feasible, electronic reminders) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism. PATIENTS/
methodsProspective cluster-randomized trial in 27 hospitals. After a pre-intervention period, centers were randomized as either intervention (n = 13) or control (n = 14). All patients over 40 years old, admitted to the emergency room, and hospitalized in a medical ward were included, totaling 1,402 (712 intervention and 690 control) and 15,351 (8,359 intervention and 6,992 control) in the pre-intervention and intervention periods, respectively.
resultsSymptomatic venous thromboembolism or major bleeding (primary outcome) occurred at 3 months in 3.1% and 3.2% of patients in the intervention and control groups, respectively (adjusted odds ratio: 1.02 [95% confidence interval: 0.78-1.34]). The rates of thromboembolism (1.9% vs. 1.9%), major bleedings (1.2% vs. 1.3%), and mortality (11.3% vs. 11.1%) did not differ between the groups. Between the pre-intervention and intervention periods, the proportion of patients who received prophylactic anticoagulant treatment more steeply increased in the intervention group (from 35.0% to 48.2%: +13.2%) than the control (40.7% to 44.1%: +3.4%), while the rate of adequate thromboprophylaxis remained stable in both groups (52.4% to 50.9%: -1.5%; 49.1% to 48.8%: -0.3%).
conclusionsOur intervention neither improved adequate prophylaxis nor reduced the rates of clinical events. New strategies are required to improve thromboembolism prevention for hospitalized medical patients.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01212393.
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.