Deep Vein Thrombosis Prophylaxis Evaluation in Intensive Care Unit
Archives of Critical Care Medicine,
Vol. 1 No. 4 (2016),
28 October 2023
Abstract
Background: One of the main causes of morbidity in hospitalized patients, and especially in the intensive care unit (ICU), is venous thromboembolism (VTE). The best way to deal with VTE is prophylaxis. Rational prophylaxis should be provided after risk factor anal[1]ysis. Different prophylaxis regimens are pharmacological and physical. Pharmacological prophylaxis regimens consist of heparin and enoxaparin that are given subcutaneously.
Objectives: The current study aimed to investigate appropriate administration of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis in ICU in an educational hospital.
Methods: Caprini risk assessment model was employed to evaluate patients‘ risk factors. Immobile patients (for three days) with at least one thrombotic risk factor were selected. The Caprini scores were identified from patients’ medical record. Three groups were identified after obtaining the scores: patients at low, medium and high risks. For each group, appropriate prophylaxis regimen was recommended.
Results: A total of 52 patients were evaluated, about 88.46% of the subjects had DVT prophylaxis indication; 10.71% received physical prophylaxis and 89.29% of them received pharmacological prophylaxis. For two-thirds of the patients with pharmacological pro[1]phylaxis enoxaparin was administered and for the other part heparin. Totally, 32.61% of the subjects received correct prophylaxis, 17.39% received inadequate prophylactic doses and 6.52% received higher doses. Totally, 67.39% of the subjects did not receive correct prophylaxis.
Conclusions: According to the collected data, appropriate DVT prophylaxis was not prescribed. It is required to pay serious atten[1]tion to this medication error. It is suggested to invest on educating medical teams about DVT prophylaxis, which is highly demanded.
- Intensive Care Unit
- Caprini Risk Assessment Model
- Deep Vein Thrombosis Prophylaxis
How to Cite
References
Caprini JA. Thrombosis risk assessment as a guide to
quality patient care. Dis Mon. 2005;51(2-3):70–8. doi:
1016/j.disamonth.2005.02.003. [PubMed: 15900257].
Sharif-Kashani B, Mohebi-Nejad A, Abooturabi SM. Estimated Prevalence of Venous Thromboembolism in Iran: Prophylaxis Still an Unmet Challenge. Tanaffos. 2015;14(1):27–33. [PubMed: 26221149].
Motykie GD, Zebala LP, Caprini JA, Lee CE, Arcelus JI, Reyna JJ, et al. A
guide to venous thromboembolism risk factor assessment. J Thromb
Thrombolysis. 2000;9(3):253–62. [PubMed: 10728025].
Polish Working Group . A scoring system for thromboembolic risk assessment in surgery, developed by the Polish Working Group, on the
basis of the scoring system developed by Joseph Caprini. Acta Angiologica. 2011;17(1):49–76.
Office of the Surgeon General . Section I: Deep Vein Thrombosis and
Pulmonary Embolism as Major Public Health Problems. US: National
Heart, Lung,Blood Institute,; 2008.
Ludwig KP, Simons HJ, Mone M, Barton RG, Kimball EJ. Implementation of an enoxaparin protocol for venous thromboembolism
prophylaxis in obese surgical intensive care unit patients. Ann
Pharmacother. 2011;45(11):1356–62. doi: 10.1345/aph.1Q313. [PubMed:
.
Armahizer MJ, Benedict NJ, June L. FAST HUG: ICU prophylaxis. Am Soc
Heal Pharm Forum. 2011:1–11.
Yang SD, Liu H, Sun YP, Yang DL, Shen Y, Feng SQ, et al. Prevalence
and risk factors of deep vein thrombosis in patients after spine
surgery: a retrospective case-cohort study. Sci Rep. 2015;5:11834. doi:
1038/srep11834. [PubMed: 26135271]
Gaspard D, Vito K, Schorr C, Hunter K, Gerber D. Comparison
of Chemical and Mechanical Prophylaxis of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonsurgical Mechanically Ventilated Patients. Thrombosis.
;2015:849142. doi: 10.1155/2015/849142. [PubMed: 26682067].
Pannucci CJ, Bailey SH, Dreszer G, Fisher Wachtman C, Zumsteg
JW, Jaber RM, et al. Validation of the Caprini risk assessment
model in plastic and reconstructive surgery patients. J Am Coll Surg.
;212(1):105–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.08.018. [PubMed:
.
Zeitoun AA, Dimassi HI, El Kary DY, Akel MG. An evaluation of practice
pattern for venous thromboembolism prevention in Lebanese hospitals. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2009;28(2):192–9. doi: 10.1007/s11239-008-
-7. [PubMed: 19110614].
Jetha L. A drug usage review of therapeutic doses of enoxaparin at Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals. London: London pharmacy education
and training pzifer project awards; 2007.
Fahimi F, Baniasadi SH, Behzadnia N, Varahram F, Ghazi Tabatabaie
L. Enoxaparin utilization evaluation: An observational prospective
study in medical inpatients. Iran J Pharm Res. 2010:77–82.
McCormick EW, Parbuoni KA, Huynh D, Morgan JA. Evaluation of
Enoxaparin Dosing and Monitoring in Pediatric Patients at Children’s Teaching Hospital. J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther. 2015;20(1):33–6. doi:
5863/1551-6776-20.1.33. [PubMed: 25859168].
Singh V, Gopinath K, Behzadpour A, Meera NK. Anticoagulant Utilization Evaluation in a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital: An Observational Prospective Study in Medical in Patients. Indian J Pharm Practice.
;8(2):61–6. doi: 10.5530/ijopp.8.2.3.
Khalili H, Dashti-Khavidaki S, Talasaz AH, Najmedin F, Hosseinpoor R. Anticoagulant utilization evaluation in a teaching hospital: a prospective study. J Pharm Pract. 2010;23(6):579–84. doi:
1177/0897190010372808. [PubMed: 21507866].
- Abstract Viewed: 110 times
- PDF Downloaded: 1 times