ArticleJornal vascular brasileiro2022
Evaluation of the diagnostic management of deep vein thrombosis in the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in Santa Catarina, Brazil: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Jornal vascular brasileiro, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Venous thromboembolism is an entity that encompasses both deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary thromboembolism. Although protocols for the diagnosis of these diseases are well defined, there is evidence of inappropriate use of diagnostic resources. Objectives: To define the epidemiological profiles of patients admitted to the emergency department with suspected deep vein thrombosis, to determine rates of inappropriate ordering of D-dimer assays and color venous Doppler echocardiography of the lower limbs, and to identify whether these requests followed the recommendations contained in the 2015 Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery guidelines. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study that retrospectively evaluated 168 patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis for whom D-dimer assays were requested. The most common risk factors were measured and the pretest probability was calculated with the Wells score. The epidemiological profile of these patients and the rates of inappropriate D-dimer testing were assessed using descriptive statistics. Results: The D-dimer requests were inadequate in 55 (32.7%) patients. Venous color Doppler ultrasound was used to examine the lower limbs of 14 (8.3%) of the patients with a low probability according to the Wells score and a negative D-dimer result. No additional diagnostic methods were used in 19 (11.3%) of those with a low probability according to the Wells score and a high D-dimer result. There was unnecessary use of CDUS in 35 (20.8%) cases. The overall rate of inappropriate workup was 53.5%. Conclusions: Differences were found between clinical practice and the recommendations for diagnostic evaluation of patients with suspected deep vein thrombosis, with inappropriate use of diagnostic tests.
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.