Effect of Post-splenectomy Booster Vaccine Program on Vaccination Compliance in Trauma Patients.

OBJECTIVE: In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Advisory Council on Immunization Practice recommended an additional post-splenectomy booster vaccine at 8 weeks following the initial vaccine. The objective of this study was to evaluate our vaccination compliance rate and what sociodemographic factors were associated with noncompliance following this recommendation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of a performance improvement database of trauma patients eligible for post-splenectomy vaccination (PSV) at a level I trauma center was carried out between 2009 and 2018. Overall and institutional compliance with PSV was compared before and after the addition of booster vaccine recommendation. Factors associated with booster noncompliance were also identified. RESULTS: A total of 257 patients were identified. PSV compliance rate in the pre-booster was 98.4%, while overall and institutional post-booster compliance rate were significantly lower at 66.9% (P ≤ .001) and 50.0% (P ≤ .001), respectively. Compared to booster institutional compliers, institutional noncompliers lived farther from the trauma center (48 vs. 86 miles, P = .02), and though not statistically significant, these patients were generally older (34.9 vs. 40.5, P = .05). DISCUSSION: PSV booster compliance is low even with the current educational materials and recommendations. Additional approaches to improve compliance rates need to be implemented, such as sending letters to the patient and their primary care providers (PCPs), collaborating with rehab/long-term acute care centers, communicating with city and county health departments and city pharmacies, or mirroring other countries and creating a national database for asplenic patients to provide complete information.

Removal of retrievable inferior vena cava filters before discharge: Is it associated with increased incidence of pulmonary embolism?

BACKGROUND: Severely injured trauma patients are at high risk of developing deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary emboli (PE), and may have contraindications to prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation. Retrievable inferior vena cava filters (rIVCFs) are used to act as a mechanical obstruction to prevent PE in high risk populations and those with deep venous thrombosis who cannot be anticoagulated. The removal rate of rIVCFs is variable in trauma centers, including our previous published rate of 50% to 89%/year. Indwelling filters carry a risk of significant morbidity and the success of retrieval decreases as the dwell time increases. We hypothesized that once patients could receive appropriate prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation, rIVCF could be removed before hospital discharge without impact on occurrence or recurrence of PE. METHODS: All trauma patients with rIVCF placed and removed between January 2006 and August 2018 were reviewed. We collected data from record review from admission to 6 months postfilter removal, including demographics, filter indication, filter type, dwell time, placement and removal complications, antithrombosis medications, location of venous thromboembolism, complications, and discharge disposition. Exposure of interest was timing of filter removal: before (BEF) or after hospital discharge (AFT). The outcome of interest was whether the patient had a documented PE within 6 months of filter removal. RESULTS: A total of 281 rIVCFs were placed, 218 were eligible for removal, 72.4% (158/218) were retrieved with 63% (100/158) removed before discharge. Mean filter duration was 26 days and 103 days for the before and after groups, respectively. No differences (p > 0.05) were noted in the distribution of demographic and clinical factors except for filter indication (venous thromboembolism indication, 95% in AFT vs. 74% in BEF, p = 0.0043). Postremoval PE rates were 0% BEF and 1% AFT (Fisher's exact test, p = 1.000). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that removal of rIVCFs before discharge once patients are appropriately anticoagulated is a safe strategy to improve retrieval rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level V.