ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2026
Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in postacute care units: a health record review.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), encompassing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a major cause of vascular-related mortality. While VTE prophylaxis (VTEp) is well established in acute care settings, its value in postacute care units, such as transitional care units (TCUs) at our institution, remains unclear. Objectives: This study therefore aimed to characterize current VTEp use in TCUs at a tertiary care hospital and to evaluate associated thrombotic and hemorrhagic outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective electronic health record review of patients admitted to TCUs at The Ottawa Hospital between March 1, 2021, and March 1, 2022. Patients on therapeutic anticoagulation for indications other than VTEp or with repeat TCU admissions were excluded. Data were collected with standardized forms and analyzed descriptively; logistic regression was used to explore associations between VTEp and thrombotic or hemorrhagic complications. Results: Among 1218 patients (mean age, 76 years; 56% female), 72% received VTEp during their TCU stay-primarily enoxaparin (85%) or unfractionated heparin (12%); 75% of these patients remained on prophylaxis for their entire TCU admission. VTEp recipients more often had recent surgery or active cancer, whereas patients in the non-VTEp group more commonly had dementia or previous gastrointestinal bleeding. The overall PE incidence and DVT incidence within 90 days were low (0.8% and 0.9%, respectively) and similar between the groups. Hemorrhagic complications, intracranial hemorrhage (0.4%), and gastrointestinal bleeding (0.9%) were likewise infrequent and comparable. Adjusted odds ratios for these outcomes included 1.0 with wide CIs. Conclusion: VTEp was used frequently and was usually continued for the full TCU stay. The number of VTE and bleeding events were low, limiting the ability to determine the optimal risk-benefit balance of VTEp use in this population.
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.