ArticleCureus2025
Clinical Audit of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Risk Assessment and Guideline Compliance in Surgical Practice.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- The Caprini score for venous thromboembolism risk assessment: A scoping review of applications, validation, and future directions.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a major cause of preventable morbidity and mortality among surgical inpatients. Despite established international guidelines, adherence to prophylaxis protocols is often suboptimal in clinical practice. Objective To evaluate and improve adherence to VTE risk assessment and prophylaxis guidelines among surgical patients at Port Sudan Doctors Hospital through a structured clinical audit. Methods A two-cycle prospective clinical audit was conducted. The first cycle (September 2024) involved a retrospective review of 50 surgical inpatient records and a gap analysis through staff interviews and observations. A two-month intervention followed, introducing a standardized VTE risk assessment tool, staff training, and integration of clinical workflows. The second cycle (January-April 2025) included a prospective review of 41 patient records and qualitative staff feedback. Data were analyzed descriptively and thematically. Results Compliance with VTE prophylaxis guidelines improved significantly from 6% in the first cycle to 85.4% in the second. Patient education increased from 4% to 95.1%, and proper documentation of prophylaxis duration improved from 6% to 95.1%. The use of structured risk assessment tools (e.g., Caprini score) increased from 7.1% to 50%, while inappropriate pharmacological prophylaxis for low-risk patients was eliminated. Staff engagement and usability of tools were also enhanced. Conclusion Targeted interventions, including standardized risk assessment and focused staff education, significantly improved VTE prophylaxis practices. Sustained improvements will require continued auditing, digital integration of tools, and institutional support to promote long-term adherence and patient safety.
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.