ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment and Prophylaxis in Trauma Patients.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The activation of multiple pathways of venous thrombosis occurs after an injury. A prophylaxis protocol is necessary to prevent early and late venous thrombotic complications.
methodsThis study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of venous thromboembolism using the Greenfield risk assessment profile score and its association with bleeding complications. This was a retrospective cohort study conducted on trauma cases who were aged 15 years or older. The study was conducted from January 2020 through December 2022. Patients who were admitted to hospital for less than 24 h or those who died during resuscitation or treatment in an emergency room were excluded from this study.
resultsWe enrolled 580 cases. Among them, 46.6% were categorized as high-risk for developing venous thromboembolism, and 30.4% of these high-risk patients received pharmaco-mechanical thromboprophylaxis. All VTE cases were high risk according to the Greenfield risk assessment profile, accounting for 3% of the entire group and 1.4% of all enrolled cases. All major bleeding complications occurred with a previously diagnosed large subdural hematoma.
conclusionsAssessing VTE risk was crucial for optimal management of prophylaxis. Proper use of pharmacological prophylaxis had to be balanced against the risk of bleeding complications.
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.