ArticleWorld journal of emergency medicine2019
Venous thromboembolism in the emergency department: A survey of current best practice awareness in physicians and nurses in China.
Article in World journal of emergency medicine, 2019. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge, risk assessment, practices, self-efficacy, attitudes, and behaviour's towards venous thromboembolism among nurses: A systematic review.Nursing open · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical Nurses' Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Catheter-Related Thrombosis and Its Influencing Factors: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2022Article
- Saddle pulmonary embolism is not a sign of high-risk deterioration in non-high-risk patients: A propensity score-matched study.World journal of emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Effects of intracoronary injection of nicorandil and tirofiban on myocardial perfusion and short-term prognosis in elderly patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction after emergency PCI.World journal of emergency medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor emergency department (ED) patients, risk assessment, prophylaxis, early diagnosis and appropriate treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) are essential for preventing morbidity and mortality. This study aimes to investigate knowledge amongst emergency medical staff in the management of VTE.
methodsWe designed a questionnaire based on multiple scales. The questionnaire was distributed to the medical and nursing clinical staff in the large urban ED of a medical center in Northern China. Data was described with percentages and the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare ranked data between different groups. The statistical analysis was done using the SPSS 22.0 software.
resultsIn this survey, 180 questionnaires were distributed and 174 valid responses (response rate of 96.67%) were collected and analyzed. In scores of VTE knowledge, no significant differences were found with respect to job (doctor vs. nurse), the number of years working in clinical medicine, education level, and current position, previous hospital experience and nurses' current work location within the ED. However, in pair wise comparison, we found participants who worked in ED for more than 5 years (
conclusionOur survey has shown deficiencies among ED medical staff in knowledge and awareness of the management of VTE. We recommend several changes be considered, such as the introduction of an interdisciplinary workshop for medical staff; the introduction of a standardized VTE protocol; a mandatory study module on VTE for new physicians and nurses; the introduction of a mandatory reporting system for adverse events (including VTE).
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.