静脉血栓预防在医疗病人中的应用综述

Mariana Nassif Kerbauy , Fabio Ynoe de Moraes , Lucila Nassif Kerbauy , Lucieni de Oliveira Conterno , Silene El-Fakhouri
{"title":"静脉血栓预防在医疗病人中的应用综述","authors":"Mariana Nassif Kerbauy ,&nbsp;Fabio Ynoe de Moraes ,&nbsp;Lucila Nassif Kerbauy ,&nbsp;Lucieni de Oliveira Conterno ,&nbsp;Silene El-Fakhouri","doi":"10.1016/S2255-4823(13)70466-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Routine thromboprophylaxis, despite its well-known effectiveness and the fact that venous thromboembolism is a potentially avoidable condition, is not fully established in clinical practice. The objectives of the present study were to determine how often thromboprophylaxis is used and the presence of thromboembolism risk factors, and to verify the appropriateness of its use in medical inpatients, assuming a long-standing national guideline as a parameter.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a retrospective cross-sectional study, involving inpatients with medical conditions in the adult general ward of a faculty hospital. The review was based on a defined guideline.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>146 patients were included in the review. At least one risk factor for venous thrombo embolism was found in 94.5%. In 130 (89%) patients, prophylactic heparin was indicated, and some kind of heparin was prescribed in 73.3%. Regarding the adequacy of prophylaxis, 53.4% of prescriptions were correct regarding prophylaxis indication and dose; 24% had incorrect dose or frequency of use; 19.2% had no prophylaxis prescription, although it was indicated; and in five cases (3.4%), the drug was prescribed, even though it was not indicated.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Thromboprophylaxis is underused in this population, and an inappropriate dose was prescribed in 50% of cases. Therefore, future studies and interventions should include an educational program started from the emergency department care, an essential step to bring evidence closer to clinical practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101100,"journal":{"name":"Revista da Associa??o Médica Brasileira (English Edition)","volume":"59 3","pages":"Pages 258-264"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S2255-4823(13)70466-1","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Venous thromboprophylaxis in medical patients: an application review\",\"authors\":\"Mariana Nassif Kerbauy ,&nbsp;Fabio Ynoe de Moraes ,&nbsp;Lucila Nassif Kerbauy ,&nbsp;Lucieni de Oliveira Conterno ,&nbsp;Silene El-Fakhouri\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S2255-4823(13)70466-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Routine thromboprophylaxis, despite its well-known effectiveness and the fact that venous thromboembolism is a potentially avoidable condition, is not fully established in clinical practice. The objectives of the present study were to determine how often thromboprophylaxis is used and the presence of thromboembolism risk factors, and to verify the appropriateness of its use in medical inpatients, assuming a long-standing national guideline as a parameter.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a retrospective cross-sectional study, involving inpatients with medical conditions in the adult general ward of a faculty hospital. The review was based on a defined guideline.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>146 patients were included in the review. At least one risk factor for venous thrombo embolism was found in 94.5%. In 130 (89%) patients, prophylactic heparin was indicated, and some kind of heparin was prescribed in 73.3%. Regarding the adequacy of prophylaxis, 53.4% of prescriptions were correct regarding prophylaxis indication and dose; 24% had incorrect dose or frequency of use; 19.2% had no prophylaxis prescription, although it was indicated; and in five cases (3.4%), the drug was prescribed, even though it was not indicated.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Thromboprophylaxis is underused in this population, and an inappropriate dose was prescribed in 50% of cases. Therefore, future studies and interventions should include an educational program started from the emergency department care, an essential step to bring evidence closer to clinical practice.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101100,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista da Associa??o Médica Brasileira (English Edition)\",\"volume\":\"59 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 258-264\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S2255-4823(13)70466-1\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista da Associa??o Médica Brasileira (English Edition)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2255482313704661\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista da Associa??o Médica Brasileira (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2255482313704661","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的常规血栓预防,尽管其众所周知的有效性和事实,静脉血栓栓塞是一个潜在的可避免的条件,并没有完全建立在临床实践。本研究的目的是确定血栓预防的使用频率和血栓栓塞危险因素的存在,并以长期存在的国家指南为参数,验证其在住院患者中的适用性。方法回顾性横断面研究,纳入某专科医院成人普通病房住院患者。审查是根据一个明确的指导方针进行的。结果共纳入146例患者。94.5%的患者至少发现了一种静脉血栓栓塞的危险因素。130例(89%)患者采用预防性肝素治疗,73.3%的患者使用某种肝素治疗。在预防的充分性方面,处方预防指征和剂量正确的占53.4%;24%的患者剂量或使用频率不正确;19.2%的患者虽有预防处方,但无预防处方;在5例(3.4%)病例中,医生开了这种药,尽管医生并没有指出这种药的必要性。结论该人群血栓预防用药不足,50%的患者处方剂量不合理。因此,未来的研究和干预措施应包括从急诊科护理开始的教育计划,这是使证据更接近临床实践的重要步骤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Venous thromboprophylaxis in medical patients: an application review

Objective

Routine thromboprophylaxis, despite its well-known effectiveness and the fact that venous thromboembolism is a potentially avoidable condition, is not fully established in clinical practice. The objectives of the present study were to determine how often thromboprophylaxis is used and the presence of thromboembolism risk factors, and to verify the appropriateness of its use in medical inpatients, assuming a long-standing national guideline as a parameter.

Methods

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study, involving inpatients with medical conditions in the adult general ward of a faculty hospital. The review was based on a defined guideline.

Results

146 patients were included in the review. At least one risk factor for venous thrombo embolism was found in 94.5%. In 130 (89%) patients, prophylactic heparin was indicated, and some kind of heparin was prescribed in 73.3%. Regarding the adequacy of prophylaxis, 53.4% of prescriptions were correct regarding prophylaxis indication and dose; 24% had incorrect dose or frequency of use; 19.2% had no prophylaxis prescription, although it was indicated; and in five cases (3.4%), the drug was prescribed, even though it was not indicated.

Conclusion

Thromboprophylaxis is underused in this population, and an inappropriate dose was prescribed in 50% of cases. Therefore, future studies and interventions should include an educational program started from the emergency department care, an essential step to bring evidence closer to clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Doppler velocimetry of the fetal middle cerebral artery and other parameters of fetal well-being in neonatal survival during pregnancies with placental insufficiency Supplemental care from a bioethical perspective Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in women exposed to wood stove smoke Prevalence of obesity in asthma and its relations with asthma severity and control Rebound effects of modern drugs: serious adverse events unknown by health professionals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1