Maintained effectiveness of an electronic alert system to prevent venous thromboembolism among hospitalized patients.

Despite current guidelines, venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is underused. Computerized programs to encourage physicians to apply thromboprophylaxis have been shown to be effective in selected populations. Our aim was to analyze the impact of the implementation of a computer-alert system for VTE risk in all hospitalized patients of a teaching hospital. A computer program linked to the clinical record database was developed to assess all hospitalized patients' VTE risk daily. The physician responsible for patients at high risk was alerted, but remained free to order or withhold prophylaxis. Over 19,000 hospitalized, medical and surgical, adult patients between January to June 2005 (pre-intervention phase), January to June 2006 and January to June 2007 (post-intervention phase), were included. During the first semesters of 2006 and 2007, an electronic alert was sent to 32.8% and 32.2% of all hospitalized patients, respectively. Appropriate prophylaxis among alerted patients was ordered in 89.7% (2006) and 88.5% (2007) of surgical patients, and in 49.2% (2006) and 64.4% (2007) of medical patients. A sustained reduction of VTE during hospitalization was achieved, Odds ratio (OR): 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.25-1.10) and OR: 0.51, 95%CI (0.24-1.05) during the first semesters of 2006 and 2007 respectively, the impact being significant (p < 0.05) among medical patients in 2007, OR: 0.36, 95%CI (0.12-0.98). The implementation of a computer-alert program helps physicians to assess each patient's thrombotic risk, leading to a better use of thromboprophylaxis, and a reduction in the incidence of VTE among hospitalized patients. For the first time, an intervention aimed to improve VTE prophylaxis shows maintained effectiveness over time.

Insights into venous thromboembolism prevention in hospitalized cancer patients: Lessons from a prospective study.

Hospitalized cancer patients are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Despite current recommendations in clinical guidelines, thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is underused. We performed an observational prospective study to analyse factors influencing prophylaxis use, VTE events and mortality in cancer-hospitalized patients. 1072 consecutive adult cancer patients were included in an University Hospital from April 2014 to February 2017, and followed-up for 30 days after discharge. The rate of LMWH prophylaxis was 67.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 64.7% to 70.4%), with a 2.8% rate of VTE events (95% CI 1.9% to 3.9%) and 3.5% rate of major bleeding events (95% CI 2.5% to 4.8%). 80% of VTE events occurred despite appropriate thromboprophylaxis. Overall, 30-day mortality rate was 13.2% (95% CI 11.2% to 15.3%). Active chemotherapy treatment, hospital stay ≥ 4 days, and metastatic disease were associated with a higher use of LMWH. On the contrary, patients with hematologic malignancies, anemia or thrombocytopenia were less prone to receive thromboprophylaxis. The main reasons for not prescribing LMWH prophylaxis were thrombocytopenia (23.9%) and active/recent bleeding (21.8%). The PRETEMED score, used for VTE risk stratification, correlated with 30-day mortality. There is room for improvement in thromboprophylaxis use among hospitalized-cancer patients, especially among those with hematologic malignancies. A relevant number of VTE events occurred despite prophylaxis with LMWH. Therefore, identification of risk factors for thromboprophylaxis failure is needed.

Factors influencing the use of thromboprophylaxis in cancer outpatients in clinical practice: A prospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Current clinical practice guidelines do not recommend routine pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in cancer outpatients receiving chemotherapy. However, a high proportion of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) events occur in this setting. There are scarce data on the use of thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients in real clinical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a single-center prospective study aimed to evaluate the use and factors influencing pharmacological prophylaxis in consecutive cancer patients receiving ambulatory chemotherapy. Patients were followed for 90 days after inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 1108 patients were included. According to the Khorana score, 45.8% patients were classified as low-risk, 47.4% intermediate-risk and 6.8% as high-risk. Outpatient pharmacological prophylaxis was administered at any time during follow-up to 157 patients (14.2%) with a median duration of 42 days (range 1-90). Main factors influencing thromboprophylaxis were: previous history of VTE (odds ratio [OR], 19.11; 95% CI, 9.61-37.98), intercurrent hospitalization (OR, 5.40; 95% CI, 3.57-8.16), and gastrointestinal or gynecologic cancer (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.11-2.80 and OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.05-5.26, respectively). During follow-up 58 (5.2%) VTE events were observed. Independent predictors of VTE were the site of malignancy (OR, 3.04; 95%CI, 1.20-7.71 and OR, 2.47; 95%CI, 1.21-5.01 for pancreas and lung cancer, respectively) and previous VTE (OR, 4.23; 95%CI, 1.26-14.27). Outpatient prophylaxis was associated with a lower risk of VTE during follow-up (OR, 0.30; 95%CI, 0.10-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Although the type of malignancy appears as the most relevant variable for decision-making, additional efforts are required to identify patients at particular high thrombosis risk.

Mortality Prediction in Patients Undergoing Non-Invasive Ventilation in Intermediate Care.

BACKGROUND: Intermediate Care Units (ImCU) have become an alternative scenario to perform Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV). The limited number of prognostic studies in this population support the need of mortality prediction evaluation in this context. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to analyze the performance of Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and 3 in patients undergoing NIV in an ImCU. Additionally, we searched for new variables that could be useful to customize these scores, in order to improve mortality prediction. DESIGN: Cohort study with prospectively collected data from all patients admitted to a single center ImCU who received NIV. The SAPS II and 3 scores with their respective predicted mortality rates were calculated. Discrimination and calibration were evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and with the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test for the models, respectively. Binary logistic regression was used to identify new variables to customize the scores for mortality prediction in this setting. PATIENTS: The study included 241 patients consecutively admitted to an ImCU staffed by hospitalists from April 2006 to December 2013. KEY RESULTS: The observed in-hospital mortality was 32.4% resulting in a Standardized Mortality Ratio (SMR) of 1.35 for SAPS II and 0.68 for SAPS 3. Mortality discrimination based on the AUC was 0.73 for SAPS II and 0.69 for SAPS 3. Customized models including immunosuppression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), acute pulmonary edema (APE), lactic acid, pCO2 and haemoglobin levels showed better discrimination than old scores with similar calibration power. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that SAPS II and 3 should be customized with additional patient-risk factors to improve mortality prediction in patients undergoing NIV in intermediate care.

High incidence of venous thromboembolism despite electronic alerts for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised cancer patients.

Many cancer patients are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during hospitalisation; nevertheless, thromboprophylaxis is frequently underused. Electronic alerts (e-alerts) have been associated with improvement in thromboprophylaxis use and a reduction of the incidence of VTE, both during hospitalisation and after discharge, particularly in the medical setting. However, there are no data regarding the benefit of this tool in cancer patients. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of a computer-alert system for VTE prevention in patients with cancer, particularly in those admitted to the Oncology/Haematology ward, comparing the results with the rest of inpatients at a university teaching hospital. The study included 32,167 adult patients hospitalised during the first semesters of years 2006 to 2010, 9,265 (28.8%) with an active malignancy. Appropriate prophylaxis in medical patients, significantly increased over time (from 40% in 2006 to 57% in 2010) and was maintained over 80% in surgical patients. However, while e-alerts were associated with a reduction of the incidence of VTE during hospitalisation in patients without cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.64), the impact was modest in cancer patients (OR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.42-1.86) and no benefit was observed in patients admitted to the Oncology/Haematology Departments (OR 1.11; 95% CI, 0.45-2.73). Interestingly, 60% of VTE episodes in cancer patients during recent years developed despite appropriate prophylaxis. Contrary to the impact on hospitalised patients without cancer, implementation of e-alerts for VTE risk did not prevent VTE effectively among those with malignancies.

Performance of SAPS II and SAPS 3 in intermediate care.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy and reliability of prognostic scores has been described extensively for intensive care, but their role for predicting mortality in intermediate care patients is uncertain. To provide more information in this field, we have analyzed the performance of the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and SAPS 3 in a single center intermediate care unit (ImCU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cohort study with prospectively collected data from all patients admitted to a single center ImCU in Pamplona, Spain, from April 2006 to April 2012. The SAPS II and SAPS 3 scores with respective predicted mortality rates were calculated according to standard coefficients. Discrimination was evaluated by calculating the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and calibration with the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated for each model. RESULTS: The study included 607 patients. The observed in-hospital mortality was 20.1% resulting in a SMR of 0.87 (95% CI 0.73-1.04) for SAPS II and 0.56 (95% CI 0.47-0.67) for SAPS 3. Both scores showed acceptable discrimination, with an AUROC of 0.76 (95% CI 0.71-0.80) for SAPS II and 0.75 (95% CI 0.71- 0.80) for SAPS 3. Calibration curves showed similar performance based on Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit C-test: (X(2)=12.9, p=0.113) for SAPS II and (X(2)=4.07, p=0.851) for SAPS 3. CONCLUSIONS: Although both scores overpredicted mortality, SAPS II showed better discrimination for patients admitted to ImCU in terms of SMR.

Results of a retrospective observational study of intermediate care staffed by hospitalists: impact on mortality, co-management, and teaching.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients are complex and institutions have to face the high cost of critical care and the limited resources of the ward. Intermediate care appears as an attractive strategy to provide rational care according to patient needs. It is an interesting scenario to expand co-management and teaching. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Intermediate care unit (ImCU) of a single academic hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 456 patients admitted from April 2006 to April 2010 were included in the study. Demographics, admission physiologic parameters and in-hospital mortality were recorded. We used the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) as prognostic score system. Co-management with medical and surgical teams, and the number of training residents were evaluated. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 20.6%, whereas the expected mortality was 23.2% based on SAPS II score. The correlation between SAPS II predicted and observed death rates was accurate and statistically significant (Rho = 1.0, p < 0.001). Co-management was performed with several medical and surgical teams, with an increase in perioperative comanagement of 22.7% (p = 0.014). The number of training residents in ImCU increased from 4.3% to 30.4% (p = 0.002) CONCLUSIONS: An ImCU led by hospitalists showed encouraging results regarding patient survival and SAPS II is an useful tool for prognostic evaluation in this population. Intermediate care serves as an expansion of role for hospitalists; and clinicians, trainees and patients may benefit from co-management and teaching opportunities at this unique level of care.