Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41158729›Full record

ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2025

Variation exists in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in traumatic brain injury despite national guidelines: insights from a recent AAST survey study.

Keith Walter Burczak, Jan-Michael Van Gent, Devi Bavishi, Gabrielle E Hatton, Patrick B Murphy, Asanthi Ratnasekera, Thomas W Clements, Rachel S Morris, Christopher Tignanelli, Bryan A Cotton and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Keith Walter BurczakThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7147-2281
Jan-Michael Van GentDivision of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4655-2527
Devi BavishiGeneral Surgery, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1498-2458
Gabrielle E HattonSurgery, University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA.
Patrick B MurphyMedical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6086-8966
Asanthi RatnasekeraSurgery, Christiana Care Health Services Inc, Newark, Delaware, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4618-088X
Thomas W ClementsSurgery, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Rachel S MorrisMedical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1227-2420
Christopher TignanelliDepartment of Surgery, University of Minnesota System, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8079-5565
Bryan A CottonSurgery, University of Texas John P and Katherine G McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4184-6742
Thaddeus J PuzioGeneral Surgery, University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4150-5956

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Best practice guidelines from trauma-focused organizations support early (<72 hours) venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis initiation in traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. Recent literature suggests that an even more aggressive initiation (24 hours) is safe and efficacious. It is unknown how current practice aligns with the existing literature and best practice guidelines. We performed a national survey to characterize variation in trauma surgeons' reported practices and attitudes regarding VTE chemoprophylaxis initiation in TBI patients with the hypothesis that they will vary widely. Methods: All 1700 American Association for the Surgery of Trauma members were surveyed online. Members who routinely cared for patients with TBI were asked to proceed with the survey. Descriptive data were reported. The questions characterized institutional guidelines, and if none existed, individual practice patterns regarding goal timeline of VTE chemoprophylaxis in TBI patients. Results: 374 members (22%) completed the survey. Most respondents worked at academic institutions (40%) and represented a level one trauma center (44%). Enoxaparin was the most common VTE chemoprophylactic (73%) with most using weight-based dosing (76%) and anti-Xa testing (75%). Institutional policies that included a protocol for VTE chemoprophylaxis initiation in TBI patients were used by 86% of respondents. In those with established protocols, 59% reported being mostly compliant. Reasons for delay of VTE chemoprophylaxis included worry about progression of TBI and disagreement with consulting services. 293 (80%) of respondents reported protocolized repeat head CT within 4-12 hours after initial CT (60%). In response to a clinical scenario, 43% of respondents reported that their goal timeline for initiating VTE prophylaxis was within 24 hours of a stable head CT. Conclusions: Despite national guidelines, substantial variation remains in the timing of VTE chemoprophylaxis in TBI patients. Passive strategies, such as institutional guidelines alone, are insufficient. Institutions must adopt more effective implementation tactics-including protocol-enforced order sets, automated clinical decision support, and shared governance models with ancillary services-to ensure timely, evidence-based care. Level of evidence: Level V.

Indexed as

Practice Patterns, Physicians'ThromboembolismTime-To-Treatmenttraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID41158729
PMCPMC12557725

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.