Inaccuracy of Initial Clinical Mobility Assessment in Venous Thromboembolism Risk Stratification.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism risk increases in hospitals due to reduced patient mobility. However, initial mobility evaluations for thromboembolism risk are often subjective and lack standardization, potentially leading to inaccurate risk assessments and insufficient prevention. METHODS: A retrospective study at a quaternary academic hospital analyzed patients using the Padua risk tool, which includes a mobility question, and the Johns Hopkins-Highest Level of Mobility (JH-HLM) scores to objectively measure mobility. Reduced mobility was defined as JH-HLM scores ≤3 over ≥3 consecutive days. The study evaluated the association between reduced mobility and hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism using multivariable logistic regression, comparing admitting health care professional assessments with JH-HLM scores. Symptomatic, hospital-acquired thromboembolisms were diagnosed radiographically by treating providers. RESULTS: Of 1715 patients, 33 (1.9%) developed venous thromboembolism. Reduced mobility, as determined by the JH-HLM scores, showed a significant association with thromboembolic events (adjusted OR: 2.53, 95%CI:1.23-5.22, P = .012). In contrast, the initial Padua assessment of expected reduced mobility at admission did not. The JH-HLM identified 19.1% of patients as having reduced mobility versus 6.5% by admitting health care professionals, suggesting 37 high-risk patients were misclassified as low risk and were not prescribed thrombosis prophylaxis; 4 patients developed thromboembolic events. JH-HLM detected reduced mobility in 36% of thromboembolic cases, compared to 9% by admitting health care professionals. CONCLUSION: Initial mobility evaluations by admitting health care professionals during venous thromboembolism risk assessment may not reflect patient mobility over their hospital stay. This highlights the need for objective measures like JH-HLM in risk assessments to improve accuracy and potentially reduce thromboembolism incidents.

What Patients Want in a Transgender Center: Building a Patient-Centered Program.

Gender affirmation is standard medical care, and community input is an essential component of patient-centered care. This study shares how our organization assessed patients' perceptions of health care organizations that provide gender-affirming care. Building on qualitative interview data, we distributed an online survey via a lesbian-gaybisexual-transgender-queer research firm. The survey was completed by 314 transgender individuals residing in 37 U.S. states and territories. Most respondents (69%) reported negative experiences seeking health care. Patients would travel long distances for competent providers and were more willing to seek care from an institution actively working to change a formerly negative reputation. Patients described high-quality organizations as prioritizing staff training (95.5%), having inclusive policies (93.3%), and hiring expert staff (86.0%). Programs should ensure cultural competency training for all staff. They should recruit and retain providers skilled in transgender medicine, especially trans-identified providers. Patient experience and reputation in the community influence where patients seek care.

Opportunistic Screening for Coronary Artery Disease: An Untapped Population Health Resource.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is the leading cause of death in the United States. At-risk asymptomatic adults are eligible for screening with electrocardiogram-gated coronary artery calcium (CAC) CT, which aids in risk stratification and management decision-making. Incidental CAC (iCAC) is easily quantified on chest CT in patients imaged for noncardiac indications; however, radiologists do not routinely report the finding. OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical significance of CAC identified incidentally on routine chest CT performed for noncardiac indications. DESIGN: An informationist developed search strategies in MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS, and two reviewers independently screened results at both the abstract and full text levels. Data extracted from eligible articles included age, rate of iCAC identification, radiologist reporting frequency, impact on downstream medical management, and association of iCAC with patient outcomes. RESULTS: From 359 unique citations, 83 research publications met inclusion criteria. The percentage of patients with iCAC ranged from 9% to 100%. Thirty-one investigations measured association(s) between iCAC and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and 29 identified significant correlations, including nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular event, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death. iCAC was present in 20% to 100% of the patients in these cohorts, but when present, iCAC was reported by radiologists in only 31% to 44% of cases. Between 18% and 77% of patients with iCAC were not on preventive medications in studies that reported these data. Seven studies measured the effect of reporting on guideline directed medical therapy, and 5 (71%) reported an increase in medication prescriptions after diagnosis of iCAC, with one confirming reductions in low-density lipoprotein levels. Twelve investigations reported good concordance between CAC grade on noncardiac CT and Agatston score on electrocardiogram-gated cardiac CT, and 10 demonstrated that artificial intelligence tools can reliably calculate an Agatston score on noncardiac CT. CONCLUSION: A body of evidence demonstrates that patients with iCAC on routine chest CT are at risk for cardiovascular disease events and death, but they are often undiagnosed. Uniform reporting of iCAC in the chest CT impression represents an opportunity for radiology to contribute to early identification of high-risk individuals and potentially reduce morbidity and mortality. AI tools have been validated to calculate Agatston score on routine chest CT and hold the best potential for facilitating broad adoption.

Systematic Evaluation of Imaging Features of Early Bladder Cancer Using Computed Tomography Performed before Pathologic Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Bladder cancer is the sixth most common malignancy in the United States (US). Despite its high prevalence and the significant potential benefits of early detection, no reliable, cost-effective screening algorithm exists for asymptomatic patients at risk. Nonetheless, reports of incidentally identified early bladder cancer on CT/MRI scans performed for other indications are emerging in the literature. This represents a new opportunity for early detection, with over 80 million CT scans performed in the US yearly, 40% of which are abdominopelvic CTs. This investigation aims to define the imaging features of early bladder cancer, with the mission of facilitating early diagnosis. METHODS: Following IRB approval with a waiver of informed consent, a retrospective review was performed, identifying 624 patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer diagnosed at Johns Hopkins Hospital between 2000 and 2019. Of these patients, 99 patients underwent pelvic CT within the 5 years preceding pathologic diagnosis. These imaging studies were reviewed retrospectively to evaluate for the presence and features of any focal bladder wall abnormality. RESULTS: Median age at the time of pathologic diagnosis was 70 years (range: 51-88 years), and 82% (81/99) of patients were male. A total of 226 CT studies were reviewed. The number of studies per patient ranged from 1 to 33. Median time interval between all available imaging and pathologic diagnosis was 14 months. A total of 62% (141/226) of the scans reviewed were performed for indications other than suspected urinary tract cancer (UTC). A bladder wall mass was visualized in 67% (66/99) of patients and on 35% (78/226) of scans performed before diagnosis. The majority (84%, 67/80) of masses were intraluminal. Mean transverse long- and short-axis measurements were 24 mm and 17 mm, respectively, with long dimension measurements ranging between 5 and 59 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Early bladder cancer was visualized on CT preceding pathologic diagnosis in more than 2/3 of patients, and the majority of scans were performed for indications other than suspected urinary tract cancer/UTC symptoms. These results suggest that cross-sectional imaging performed for other indications can serve as a resource for opportunistic bladder cancer screening, particularly in high-risk patients.

Utilization and cost of cell salvage in minimally invasive myomectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utilization and cost of intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) in minimally invasive myomectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent minimally invasive myomectomy at a quaternary care academic hospital. Patients were classified into: ICS setup vs no ICS setup, ICS setup with reinfusion vs ICS setup without reinfusion. RESULTS: Of 382 patients who underwent minimally invasive myomectomy, 67 (17.5 %) had ICS setup, 30 (44.8 %) of those patients reinfused. Median volume of reinfusion per patient was 300 mL (range 125-1000 mL). Patients who ultimately underwent ICS reinfusion, compared to those with ICS setup only, had significantly larger mean maximum fibroid size (9.8 cm vs 8.0 cm, p = 0.02), higher median total specimen weight (367 vs 304 g, p = 0.03), higher median estimated blood loss (575 vs 300 mL, p < 0.0001), longer mean operative time (261 vs 215 min, p = 0.04). No perioperative complications were associated with ICS. Higher costs are associated with universal use or complete lack of ICS; lowest cost is associated with ICS setup only for those ultimately reinfused. CONCLUSION: ICS might reduce requirements for allogeneic blood transfusions in patients undergoing minimally invasive myomectomy, and may contribute to cost savings. Uterine and maximum fibroid sizes are possible preoperative indicators for patients who require cell salvage reinfusion.

Alert-Triggered Patient Education Versus Nurse Feedback for Nonadministered Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Doses: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background Many hospitalized patients are not administered prescribed doses of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Methods and Results In this cluster-randomized controlled trial, all adult non-intensive care units (10 medical, 6 surgical) in 1 academic hospital were randomized to either a real-time, electronic alert-triggered, patient-centered education bundle intervention or nurse feedback intervention to evaluate their effectiveness for reducing nonadministration of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Primary outcome was the proportion of nonadministered doses of prescribed pharmacologic prophylaxis. Secondary outcomes were proportions of nonadministered doses stratified by nonadministration reasons (patient refusal, other). To test our primary hypothesis that both interventions would reduce nonadministration, we compared outcomes pre- versus postintervention within each cohort. Secondary hypotheses were tested comparing the effectiveness between cohorts. Of 11 098 patient visits, overall dose nonadministration declined significantly after the interventions (13.4% versus 9.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.57-0.71]). Nonadministration decreased significantly (P<0.001) in both arms: patient-centered education bundle, 12.2% versus 7.4% (OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.48-0.66]), and nurse feedback, 14.7% versus 11.2% (OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.62-0.84]). Patient refusal decreased significantly in both arms: patient-centered education bundle, 7.3% versus 3.7% (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.37-0.58]), and nurse feedback, 9.5% versus 7.1% (OR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.59-0.86]). No differential effect occurred on medical versus surgical units. The patient-centered education bundle was significantly more effective in reducing all nonadministered (P=0.03) and refused doses (P=0.003) compared with nurse feedback (OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.0-1.61]; P=0.03 for interaction). Conclusions Information technology strategies like the alert-triggered, targeted patient-centered education bundle, and nurse-focused audit and feedback can improve venous thromboembolism prophylaxis administration. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03367364.

Effectiveness of Healthcare Delivery, Quality, and Safety a Patient Education Bundle on Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Administration by Sex.

INTRODUCTION: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent cause of preventable harm among hospitalized patients. Many prescribed prophylaxis doses are not administered despite supporting evidence. We previously demonstrated a patient-centered education bundle improved VTE prophylaxis administration broadly; however, patient-specific factors driving nonadministration are unclear. We examine the effects of the education bundle on missed doses of VTE prophylaxis by sex. METHODS: We performed a post-hoc analysis of a nonrandomized controlled trial to evaluate the differences in missed doses by sex. Pre-intervention and intervention periods for patients admitted to 16 surgical and medical floors between 10/2014-03/2015 (pre-intervention) and 04/2015-12/2015 (intervention) were compared. We examined the conditional odds of (1) overall missed doses, (2) missed doses due to patient refusal, and (3) missed doses for other reasons. RESULTS: Overall, 16,865 patients were included (pre-intervention 6853, intervention 10,012), with 2350 male and 2460 female patients (intervention), and 6373 male and 5682 female patients (control). Any missed dose significantly reduced on the intervention floors among male (odds ratio OR 0.55; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.44-0.70, P < 0.001) and female (OR 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47-0.73, P < 0.001) patients. Similar significant reductions ensued for missed doses due to patient refusal (P < 0.001). Overall, there were no sex-specific differences (P-interaction >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our intervention increased VTE prophylaxis administration for both female and male patients, driven by decreased patient refusal. Patient education should be applicable to a wide range of patient demographics representative of the target group. To improve future interventions, quality improvement efforts should be evaluated based on patient demographics and drivers of differences in care.

Gender Affirming Surgery: A Comprehensive, Systematic Review of All Peer-reviewed Literature and Methods of Assessing Patient-centered Outcomes (Part 1: Breast/Chest, Face, and Voice).

OBJECTIVE: To perform the first systematic review of all available gender-affirming surgery (GAS) publications across all procedures to assess both outcomes reported in the literature and the methods used for outcome assessment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Rapidly increasing clinical volumes of gender-affirming surgeries have stimulated a growing need for high-quality clinical research. Although some procedures have been performed for decades, each individual procedure has limited data, necessitating synthesis of the entire literature to understand current knowledge and guide future research. METHODS: A systematic review was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify all outcomes measures in GAS cohorts, including PCOs, complications, and functional outcomes. Outcome data were pooled to assess currently reported complication, satisfaction, and other outcome rates. RESULTS: Overall, 15,186 references were identified, 4162 papers advanced to abstract review, and 1826 underwent full-text review. After review, there were 406 GAS cohort publications. Of non-genitoplasty titles, 35 were mastectomy, 6 mammoplasty, 21 facial feminization, and 31 voice/cartilage. Although 59.1% of non-genitoplasty papers addressed PCOs in some form, only 4.3% used instruments partially-validated in transgender patients. Overall, data were reported heterogeneously and were biased towards high-volume centers. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the most comprehensive review of GAS literature. By aggregating all previously utilized measurement instruments, this study offers a foundation for discussions about current methodologic limitations and what dimensions must be included in assessing surgical success. We have assembled a comprehensive list of outcome instruments; this offers an ideal starting basis for emerging discussions between patients and providers about deficiencies which new, better instruments and metrics must address. The lack of consistent use of the same outcome measures and validated GAS-specific instruments represent the 2 primary barriers to high-quality research where improvement efforts should be focused.

Gender Affirming Surgery: A Comprehensive, Systematic Review of All Peer-reviewed Literature and Methods of Assessing Patient-centered Outcomes (Part 2: Genital Reconstruction).

OBJECTIVE: To perform the first systematic review of all available GAS publications across all procedures to assess outcomes reported in the literature and the methods used for outcome assessment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Assessment of GAS results is complex and multidimensional, involving not only complication rates but also anatomic (eg, vaginal depth), functional (eg, urinary), and psychosocial outcomes. A fully comprehensive aggregation of all prior research would offer an essential cornerstone for continued progress. METHODS: A systematic review was performed after PRISMA guidelines to identify all outcomes measures in GAS cohorts, including patient-centered outcomes, complications, and functional outcomes. Data were aggregated to assess pooled rates of complications, satisfaction, and other outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 15,186 references were identified, 4162 papers advanced to abstract review, and 1826 underwent full-text review. After review, there were 406 GAS cohort publications, including 171 vaginoplasty, 82 phalloplasty, 16 metoidioplasty, 23 oophorectomy/vaginectomy, and 21 with multiple procedures.Although 68.7% of genitoplasty papers addressed patient-centered outcomes, only 1.0% used metrics validated in the transgender population. Forty-three different outcome instruments were used. No instrument was used in more than 15% of published series and 38 were used in only 1 or 2 publications. CONCLUSIONS: Our review found high patient satisfaction for genital procedures but little concordance between study methods, with almost 90% of patient-focused outcome metrics appearing only once or twice. Standardization of outcome instruments and measurement methods through patient-inclusive, multidisciplinary consensus efforts is the essential next step for quality improvement. As GAS continues to mature, building on current foundations with the goal of improving both surgical and patient-reported outcomes is essential.

Systematic Undercoding of Diagnostic Procedures in National Inpatient Sample (NIS): A Threat to Validity Due to Surveillance Bias.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Health services research often relies on readily available data, originally collected for administrative purposes and used for public reporting and pay-for-performance initiatives. We examined the prevalence of underreporting of diagnostic procedures for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE), used for public reporting and pay-for-performance initiatives. METHOD: We retrospectively identified procedures for AMI, DVT, and PE in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database between 2012 and 2016. From January 1, 2012, through September 30, 2015, the NIS used the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) coding scheme. From October 1, 2015, through December 31, 2016, the NIS used the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) coding scheme. We grouped the data by ICD code definitions (ICD-9 or ICD-10) to reflect these code changes and to prevent any confounding or misclassification. In addition, we used survey weighting to examine the utilization of venous duplex ultrasound scan for DVT, electrocardiogram (ECG) for AMI, and chest computed tomography (CT) scan, pulmonary angiography, echocardiography, and nuclear medicine ventilation/perfusion () scan for PE. RESULTS: In the ICD-9 period, by primary diagnosis, only 0.26% (n = 5930) of patients with reported AMI had an ECG. Just 2.13% (n = 7455) of patients with reported DVT had a peripheral vascular ultrasound scan. For patients with PE diagnosis, 1.92% (n = 12 885) had pulmonary angiography, 3.92% (n = 26 325) had CT scan, 5.31% (n = 35 645) had cardiac ultrasound scan, and 0.45% (n = 3025) had scan. In the ICD-10 period, by primary diagnosis, 0.04% (n = 345) of reported AMI events had an ECG and 0.91% (n = 920) of DVT events had a peripheral vascular ultrasound scan. For patients with PE diagnosis, 2.08% (n = 4805) had pulmonary angiography, 0.63% (n = 1460) had CT scan, 1.68% (n = 3890) had cardiac ultrasound scan, and 0.06% (n = 140) had scan. Small proportions of diagnostic procedures were observed for any diagnoses of AMI, DVT, or PE. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings question the validity of using NIS and other administrative databases for health services and outcomes research that rely on certain diagnostic procedures. Unfortunately, the NIS does not provide granular data that can control for differences in diagnostic procedure use, which can lead to surveillance bias. Researchers and policy makers must understand and acknowledge the limitations inherent in these databases, when used for pay-for-performance initiatives and hospital benchmarking.

Audit and Feedback to Surgery Interns and Residents on Prescribing Risk-Appropriate Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of feedback using an emailed scorecard and a web-based dashboard on risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis prescribing practices among general surgery interns and residents. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: The Johns Hopkins Hospital, an urban academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: All 45 trainees (19 post-graduate year [PGY] 1 interns and 26 PGY-2 to PGY-5 residents) in our general surgery program. INTERVENTION: Feedback implementation encompassed three sequential periods: (1) scorecard (July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015); (2) no feedback/wash-in (July 1 through October 31, 2015); and (3) web-based dashboard (November 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016). No feedback served as the baseline period for the intern cohort. The scorecard was a static document showing an individual's compliance with risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis prescription compared to compliance of their de-identified peers. The web-based dashboard included other information (e.g., patient details for suboptimal prophylaxis orders) besides individual compliance compared to their de-identified peers. Trainees could access the dashboard anytime to view current and historic performance. We sent monthly emails to all trainees for both feedback mechanisms. Main outcome was proportion of patients prescribed risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis, and mean percentages reported. RESULTS: During this study, 4088 VTE prophylaxis orders were placed. Among residents, mean prescription of risk-appropriate prophylaxis was higher in the wash-in (98.4% vs 95.6%, p < 0.001) and dashboard (98.4 vs 95.6%, p < 0.001) periods compared to the scorecard period. There was no difference in mean compliance between the wash-in and dashboard periods (98.4% vs 98.4%, p = 0.99). Among interns, mean prescription of risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis improved between the wash-in and dashboard periods (91.5% vs 96.4%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Using audit and individualized performance feedback to general surgery trainees through a web-based dashboard improved prescribing of appropriate VTE prophylaxis to a near-perfect performance.

Nonadministration of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is less common in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 is higher than most other hospitalized patients. Nonadministration of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis is common and is associated with VTE events. Our objective was to determine whether nonadministration of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis is more common in patients with COVID-19 versus other hospitalized patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort analysis of all adult patients discharged from the Johns hopkins hospital between Mar 1 and May 12, 2020, we compared demographic, clinical characteristics, VTE outcomes, prescription and administration of VTE prophylaxis between COVID-19 positive, negative, and not tested groups. RESULTS: Patients tested positive for COVID-19 were significantly older, and more likely to be Hispanic, have a higher median body mass index, have longer hospital length of stay, require mechanical ventilation, develop pulmonary embolism and die (all p < 0.001). COVID-19 patients were more likely to be prescribed (aOR 1.51, 95% CI 1.38-1.66) and receive all doses of prescribed pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.36-1.62). The number of patients who missed at least one dose of VTE prophylaxis and developed VTE was similar between the three groups (p = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: It is unlikely that high rates of VTE in COVID-19 are due to nonadministration of doses of pharmacologic prophylaxis. Hence, we should prioritize research into alternative approaches to optimizing VTE prevention in patients with COVID-19.

Effectiveness of ambulation to prevent venous thromboembolism in patients admitted to hospital: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient ambulation is frequently recommended to help prevent venous thromboembolism during hospital admission. Our objective was to synthesize the evidence for ambulation as a prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in hospital. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials indexed from their inception through April 2020 for studies of adult patients admitted to hospital, in which ambulation or mobilization alone or concomitant with prophylaxis was indicated for prevention of venous thromboembolism. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for unpublished trials. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Two reviewers independently screened articles and assessed risk of bias using 2 validated tools. We scored studies on quality of reporting, internal and external validity and study power; combined scores determined the overall quality. RESULTS: Eighteen articles met the inclusion criteria: 8 retrospective and 2 prospective cohorts, 7 RCTs and 1 secondary analysis of an RCT. The intervention (ambulation or mobilized) groups varied across studies. Five studies examined exercise as a therapeutic prophylaxis for thrombosis and 9 described an ambulation protocol. Five studies attempted to quantify amount and duration of patient ambulation and 3 reported ambulation distance. In the 5 studies rated as good or excellent statistical quality, findings were mixed. Incidence of venous thromboembolism was lowest when pharmacologic anticoagulants were added as part of the prescribed prophylaxis regimen. INTERPRETATION: We did not find high-quality evidence supporting ambulation alone as an effective prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism. Ambulation should not be considered an adequate prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism, nor as an adequate reason to discontinue pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism during a patient's hospital admission.

What Does Venous Thromboembolism Mean in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program?

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) affects an estimated 350,000 to 600,000 individuals and causes approximately 100,000 deaths annually in the United States. Postoperative VTE is a core measure reported by The American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). The objective of this research was to assess the validity of VTE events reported by NSQIP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis using NSQIP data from January 2006 through December 2018 and the electronic health record system data from five adult hospitals in the Johns Hopkins Health System. We included patients aged 18 years and older with a VTE event identified in our NSQIP data set. The main outcome measure was the proportion of valid VTE events, defined as concordant between the NSQIP data set and medical chart review for clinical documentation. RESULTS: Of 474 patients identified in our NSQIP database with a VTE, 26 (5.5%) did not meet the strict NSQIP definition of VTE. Nine had a preoperative history of DVT and no new postoperative event, seven had a negative workup for VTE, six had a peripheral arterial thrombus, two did not receive or refused therapy, one had an aortic thrombus, and one had a venous thrombosis in a surgical flap. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a considerable number of surgical patients misclassified as having a VTE in NSQIP, when did not truly. This highlights the need to improve definition specificity and standardize processes involved in data extraction, validation, and reporting to provide unbiased data for use in quality improvement.