ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2023
Thromboprophylaxis practices in neurocritical care-A cross-sectional survey among neurocritical care practitioners.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Healthcare research data sharing and academic journal: A challenging but fruitful initiative.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Thromboprophylaxis practice patterns are quite diverse in neurocritical care patients. The risk of venous thromboembolism remains high in this group due to prolonged immobilised status, extended length of stay and multiple comorbidities. The aim was to comprehend the thromboprophylaxis practices among neurocritical care practitioners in India. Methods: The cross-sectional online questionnaire-based survey was undertaken among the neurocritical care practitioners. Two investigators framed two sets of 15 questions in the first stage and reviewed them with experts. In the second stage, a set of 22 questions was prepared by a third investigator and pretested among ten experts. The questions were emailed to the participants with a link to the survey. The responses were analysed using Statistical Package For The Social Sciences software. Results: Of the 185 responses, 53% reported that thromboprophylaxis is practised less often in neurocritical care than in general critical care. The usage of pharmacoprophylaxis among neurosurgical cases, traumatic brain injuries and brain strokes varies widely. There was a preference to use pharmacoprophylaxis in patients with Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) below nine among many (68.2%), and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) was the preferred choice in such cases. The reluctance to use heparin because of fear of bleed was high (82%). Most (78.9%) believed pharmacoprophylaxis could reduce venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) and mortality. Conclusion: Thromboprophylaxis practices among neurocritical care patients remain quite heterogeneous. There is a dilemma in patients with intracranial haemorrhagic lesions regarding pharmacoprophylaxis.
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.