Observational studyMedicine2020
Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients hospitalized in medical wards: A real life experience.
Observational study in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- An update on the global use of risk assessment models and thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with medical illnesses from the World Thrombosis Day steering committee: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Enhancing venous thromboembolism prophylaxis compliance: a quality initiative for standardised risk assessment in a hospital setting.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Caprini versus Padua venous thromboembolism risk assessment scores: A comparative study in hospitalized patients at a tertiary center.Saudi medical journal · 2024Article
- Incidence and factors associated with deep vein thrombosis among hospitalized adult patients at Hawassa university comprehensive specialized hospital Hawassa city, Sidama, Ethiopia: retrospective cohort study.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2024Article
- The Benefits and Imperative of Venous Thromboembolism Risk Screening for Hospitalized Patients: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Medical and Surgical Patients - What's Our Reality?Cureus · 2023Article
- VTE Prophylaxis Therapy: Clinical Practice vs Clinical Guidelines.Vascular health and risk management · 2022Observational
- Incidence of thromboembolism and thromboprophylaxis in medical patients admitted to specialized hospital in Ethiopia using Padua prediction score.SAGE open medicine · 2022Article
- Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Infectious Disease.Tuberculosis and respiratory diseases · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a preventable cause of morbidity and mortality in acutely ill patients hospitalized in medical departments. Thromboprophylaxis with anticoagulants was shown to be safe and effective in medical patients with high risk to develop VTE. Despite guidelines recommendations, the rate of thromboprophylaxis in those patients is low. The objective of the study was to evaluate the rate of VTE risk assessment in routine medical department practice, the rate of eligible patients for thromboprophylaxis, the rate of patients who received thromboprophylaxis, and their outcome.Medical records of consecutive patients (3000 at 2013, 1000 at 2018) hospitalized in medical department were reviewed, retrospectively, for demographic, clinical characteristics, thromboprophylaxis treatment with enoxaparin and outcome (up to 90 days following discharge). Padua score was used for VTE risk assessment. VTE diagnosis was based on clinical suspicion.The mean patient's age (52.6% females) was 67.95 ± 21.56 years. 21% were eligible for thromboprophylaxis. Routine VTE risk assessment rate increased significantly following its incorporation into quality parameters, but the rate of treated patients was low (22% at 2013; 46% at 2018). The patients who received thromophylaxis were sicker compared to eligible patients without thromboprophylaxis. The rate of symptomatic VTE was low (0.24%; 0.12% and 0.55% for low and high VTE risk, respectively). Thromboprophylaxis did not have significant effect on the low number of VTE events. No major bleeding was observed.Major efforts are still needed to increase the rate of thromboprophylaxis in all eligible medical patients according to the guidelines recommendations.
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.