ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2025
Intermittent pneumatic compression thromboprophylaxis among critically ill children: a single-center retrospective cohort study.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mechanical thromboprophylaxis, including intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC), is administered as primary prevention against hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (HAVTE) in critically ill children without supportive evidence of VTE risk reduction. Objectives: We aimed to assess the association between IPC thromboprophylaxis and HAVTE in critically ill children. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study of children aged <18 years hospitalized in a pediatric intensive care unit from 2020 to 2023. Those with a VTE present on admission or receiving therapeutic anticoagulation were excluded. Patients were classified into HAVTE risk tiers (low, moderate, and high) using previously validated criteria. The primary outcome was radiographically confirmed HAVTE. For each HAVTE risk tier, logistic regression was employed to test associations between HAVTE and IPC thromboprophylaxis, reporting odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs. Results: Of 4440 children studied, 30 (0.7%) had a HAVTE diagnosed at a median of 4.2 (IQR: 2.9-8.3) days after hospitalization. IPC was prescribed for 831 (18.7%) children. No association between IPC and HAVTE was detected for patients classified as high risk (OR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.1-1.4) or moderate risk (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.23-2.82) for HAVTE but was detected for those classified as low risk (OR: 6.3; 95% CI: 1.7-23.7). Conclusion: In this single-center cohort of critically ill children, IPC thromboprophylaxis was commonly prescribed but was not associated with HAVTE risk reduction among patients at high/moderate risk for HAVTE. These findings corroborate recent multicenter administrative database findings and underscore the need for risk-stratified clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of IPC thromboprophylaxis in critically ill children.
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.