Impact of thromboprophylaxis on hospital acquired thrombosis following discharge in patients admitted with COVID-19: Multicentre observational study in the UK.

Post-discharge thromboprophylaxis in patients admitted with COVID-19 remains controversial. We aimed to determine the impact of thromboprophylaxis on hospital acquired thrombosis (HAT) in patients (≥18 years) discharged following admission for COVID-19 in an observational study across 26 NHS Trusts in the UK (01.04.2020-31.12.2021). Overall, 8895 patients were included to the study: 971 patients were discharged with thromboprophylaxis and propensity score matched (PSM) with a desired ratio of 1:1, from patients discharged without thromboprophylaxis. Patients with heparin induced thrombocytopenia, major bleeding during admission and pregnant women were excluded. As expected from 1:1 PSM, no difference was observed in parameters between the two groups, including duration of hospital stay, except the thromboprophylaxis group had a significantly higher proportion who had received therapeutic dose anticoagulation during admission. There were no differences in the laboratory parameters especially D-dimers between the two groups at admission or discharge. Median duration of thromboprophylaxis following discharge from hospital was 4 weeks (1-8 weeks). No difference was found in HAT in patients discharged with TP versus no TP (1.3% vs. 0.92%, p = 0.52). Increasing age and smoking significantly increased the risk of HAT. Many patients in both cohorts had raised D-dimer at discharge but D-dimer was not associated with increased risk of HAT.

Can We Use Routinely Collected Healthcare Data for a Nationwide Trial on Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Following Primary Joint Replacement? A Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: UK hospitals nationally report venous thromboembolism (VTE) within 90 days of hospital admission, with hospital-acquired thrombosis (HAT) registers at each center used for this. We assessed the accuracy of our HAT register in identifying VTE following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: We assessed 982 elective admissions for primary THA and TKA at a large tertiary center during 2018. The primary outcome was any VTE (deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism) within 90 days postsurgery. VTEs were identified by systematically searching hospital databases (including discharge and outpatient letters, readmissions, emergency department visits, and imaging) for every patient. VTEs were also collected using the HAT database at our center, which is maintained regularly by a specialist nursing team and used to report VTEs nationally. Diagnostic test characteristics were assessed for HAT in identifying VTEs compared to the gold standard (ie, VTEs from the hospital databases). RESULTS: The prevalence of VTE was 2.7% (n = 27), with 20 VTEs identified by HAT. The accuracy of HAT in identifying VTEs were as follows: sensitivity = 74.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 53.7-88.9), specificity = 100% (CI = 99.6-100), positive predictive value = 100% (CI = 83.2-100), and negative predictive value = 99.3% (CI = 98.5-99.7). CONCLUSION: One-quarter of VTEs occurring after THA and TKA were not identified by the HAT register. These cases would be missing when our hospital's data are sent for national VTE reporting, and therefore would have substantial implications if HAT was primarily used to identify VTEs in a trial. Further work is needed to improve the accuracy of HAT VTE reporting before this could be relied upon in this setting.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Strategies for People Undergoing Elective Total Hip Replacement: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in people undergoing elective total hip replacement. METHODS: Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were conducted for 3 outcomes: deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and major bleeding (MB). MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) databases were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias checklist. Fixed- and random-effects models were fitted and compared. The median relative risk (RR) and odds ratio (OR) compared with no prophylaxis, with their 95% credible intervals (CrIs), rank, and probability of being the best, were calculated. RESULTS: Forty-two (n = 24 374, 26 interventions), 30 (n = 28 842, 23 interventions), and 24 (n = 31 792, 15 interventions) randomized controlled trials were included in the DVT, PE, and MB networks, respectively. Rivaroxaban had the highest probability of being the most effective intervention for DVT (RR 0.06 [95% CrI 0.01-0.29]). Strategy of low-molecular-weight heparin followed by aspirin had the highest probability of reducing the risk of PE and MB (RR 0.0011 [95% CrI 0.00-0.096] and OR 0.37 [95% CrI 0.00-26.96], respectively). The ranking of efficacy estimates across the 3 networks, particularly PE and MB, had very wide CrIs, indicating high degree of uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of low-molecular-weight heparin given for 10 days followed by aspirin for 28 days had the best benefit-risk balance, with the highest probability of being the best on the basis of the results of the PE and MB network meta-analyses. Nevertheless, there is considerable uncertainty around the median ranks of the interventions.

Thromboprophylaxis in Patients Admitted to the Surgical Ward: Clinical Audit.

Background: Hospital-acquired thrombosis (HAT) is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and financial burden globally. Following trusted guidelines for VTE prevention has shown effective, safe, and satisfactory results. This prompts national collaborative efforts to maintain a consensus approach for the safe risk assessment of inpatients and the prescription of thromboprophylaxis. Objective: This study aimed to detect and estimate deviations from international thromboprophylaxis protocols. The study also aimed to raise the quality of practice and adherence to evidence-based protocols in Alshuhada Teaching Hospital. Methods: A cross-sectional audit of general surgical inpatients was performed from October 2021 to May 2022. The first cycle was from 1/10/2021 to 21/10/2021, and the second cycle was from 13/5/2022 to 31/5/2022. The target population was adults aged >18 years. Data were collected via an online checklist on two separate occasions. The criteria were based on the NICE guideline for venous thromboembolism in individuals aged over 16 years: "Reducing the risk of hospital-acquired deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism NG89". Results: Forty-five surgical inpatients were included in this study: 20 in the first cycle and 25 in the second cycle. The first-cycle report showed that only 25% of VTE candidates received this regimen. In the second cycle, practice significantly improved, with 92% of admitted patients having their risk assessment tool completed within 24 h of admission. 79% of VTE prophylaxis candidates were prescribed adequate pharmacological prophylaxis within 14 h of admission. Conclusion: The rate of adequate thromboprophylaxis for inpatients undergoing surgery was very low before clinicians received education on VTE prevention, whereas was evidently high after they had received them. The cause of non-adherence in the pre-intervention phase was a lack of adequate knowledge regarding the magnitude and burden of HAT and the importance of thromboprophylaxis, which has a potential role in preventing the majority of HAT.

Systematic review on the benefit of graduated compression stockings in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in low-risk surgical patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review is to assess the performance of graduated compression stockings (GCS) in comparison to no venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in the prevention of hospital-acquired thrombosis in low-risk surgical patients undergoing short-stay procedures. METHODS: Aligning with PRISMA guidelines, online databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, Cochrane Library® and trial registries were searched. Eligible articles reported the VTE rate in low-risk surgical patients either receiving GCS or no VTE prophylaxis. RESULTS: Narrative synthesis was performed on a single eligible article. The included study arm consisted of participants undergoing knee arthroscopy with the use of GCS alone reporting a total of 29 VTE events (4.4%), 16 of which were asymptomatic DVTs (2.4%). CONCLUSION: There is a complete lack of evidence to support the use of GCS in the prevention of HAT for low-risk surgical patients. An adequately powered trial is required to provide level-IA evidence to support this practice.

The impact of the DoH Commissioning for Quality and Innovation incentive on the success of venous thromboembolism risk assessment in hospitalised patients. A single institution experience in a quality outcome improvement over a 4-year cycle.

OBJECTIVES: To i) demonstrate compliance with the Commissioning for Quality and Innovation for venous thromboembolism risk assessment ii) to undertake root cause analysis of Hospital Acquired Thrombosis and to investigate its impact on quality of care. DESIGN: Prospective monitoring of all admissions. SETTING: Imperial College Healthcare Hospitals, London. PARTICIPANTS: All Hospital Provider Spells as defined on the NHS Data Model and Dictionary. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: i) Percentage of patients undergoing Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment (VTE-RA) at and 24-hours after admission ii) root cause analysis of Hospital Acquired Thrombosis up to 90 days following discharge. RESULTS: Over a 48-month cycle 83% were overall VTE-RA assessed with 36% in the first 12 months but with significant improvement to ≥95% between April 2013 and April 2015, achieving compliance target since April 2012 involving a massive 633, 850 Spells over the 4 year period. We undertook root cause analysis of all VTE episodes from April 2013 to March 2014, to ascertain Hospital Acquired Thrombosis (HAT), we analysed 433, 174 inpatient days and found a HAT rate of 1 per 1000 with 23% and 24% for DVTs and PEs potentially avoidable respectively. We further analysed VTE risk stratification (n = 1000) and found 37.0% at high risk, 44.4% at medium risk and 18.6 % at low risk, indicating the need of thromboprophylaxis in 81.4% (high and medium) of whom 33.6% were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: We achieved 95% RA compliance which has favourably impacted on our daily practice and improved the quality of the clinical care.