择期骨科手术的老年患者围手术期抗凝治疗方案的依从性:一项548例患者的回顾性观察队列研究

IF 2.6 Q1 SURGERY Patient Safety in Surgery Pub Date : 2023-04-20 DOI:10.1186/s13037-023-00357-w
Lizzie Munk, Tom van Essen, Casper van der Hoeven, Peter A Nolte, Matthijs L Becker
{"title":"择期骨科手术的老年患者围手术期抗凝治疗方案的依从性:一项548例患者的回顾性观察队列研究","authors":"Lizzie Munk,&nbsp;Tom van Essen,&nbsp;Casper van der Hoeven,&nbsp;Peter A Nolte,&nbsp;Matthijs L Becker","doi":"10.1186/s13037-023-00357-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Compliance with perioperative anticoagulation guidelines is essential to minimize bleeding and thromboembolic risks in patients undergoing surgery. Compared to vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs), perioperative management of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) contains fewer steps. Therefore, we hypothesized that noncompliance with guidelines in VKA users is higher than in DOAC users. The primary aim of our study was to investigate the difference in noncompliance to perioperative anticoagulant management guidelines between elderly patients using VKAs versus those using DOACs. The secondary aim was to determine the difference in occurrence of conflicting information communicated to the patients and the difference in incidence of coagulation-related adverse events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective non-controlled observational cohort study examined elderly patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. All patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery between 1 May 2016 and 1 January 2020, aged 70 years and over, using VKAs or DOACs were selected. Nonelective surgeries were excluded. The primary outcome was the noncompliance to perioperative anticoagulant management guidelines. Secondary outcomes were missing or conflicting information on anticoagulation management communicated to the patient and coagulation-related adverse events. For continuous data, the unpaired T-test was used and for categorical data, the chi-square test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In patients using VKAs, noncompliance to one of the steps of perioperative anticoagulation management was 81%, compared to 55% in patients using DOACs (p < 0.001). In most cases, VKAs or DOACs were interrupted for longer than recommended. In 13% of patients using a VKA with perioperative bridging, bridging was not conducted as recommended in the guidelines. In 13% of patients using a DOAC, a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was prescribed while a DOAC had already been restarted postoperatively. VKA users received conflicting information about perioperative anticoagulation management more often than DOAC users (33% versus 20%; p < 0.001). No difference was seen in postoperative coagulation-related complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Guidelines compliance in DOAC users is higher than in VKA users. Clinical decision support to help in selecting the right interruption interval in DOAC users, simplified standardized perioperative management, good coordination of instructions given to patients, and familiarity with updated guidelines are important in reducing noncompliance.</p>","PeriodicalId":46782,"journal":{"name":"Patient Safety in Surgery","volume":"17 1","pages":"9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10116649/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compliance to perioperative anticoagulation protocols in elderly patients undergoing elective orthopedic procedures: a retrospective observational cohort study on 548 patients.\",\"authors\":\"Lizzie Munk,&nbsp;Tom van Essen,&nbsp;Casper van der Hoeven,&nbsp;Peter A Nolte,&nbsp;Matthijs L Becker\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13037-023-00357-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Compliance with perioperative anticoagulation guidelines is essential to minimize bleeding and thromboembolic risks in patients undergoing surgery. Compared to vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs), perioperative management of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) contains fewer steps. Therefore, we hypothesized that noncompliance with guidelines in VKA users is higher than in DOAC users. The primary aim of our study was to investigate the difference in noncompliance to perioperative anticoagulant management guidelines between elderly patients using VKAs versus those using DOACs. The secondary aim was to determine the difference in occurrence of conflicting information communicated to the patients and the difference in incidence of coagulation-related adverse events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective non-controlled observational cohort study examined elderly patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. All patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery between 1 May 2016 and 1 January 2020, aged 70 years and over, using VKAs or DOACs were selected. Nonelective surgeries were excluded. The primary outcome was the noncompliance to perioperative anticoagulant management guidelines. Secondary outcomes were missing or conflicting information on anticoagulation management communicated to the patient and coagulation-related adverse events. For continuous data, the unpaired T-test was used and for categorical data, the chi-square test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In patients using VKAs, noncompliance to one of the steps of perioperative anticoagulation management was 81%, compared to 55% in patients using DOACs (p < 0.001). In most cases, VKAs or DOACs were interrupted for longer than recommended. In 13% of patients using a VKA with perioperative bridging, bridging was not conducted as recommended in the guidelines. In 13% of patients using a DOAC, a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was prescribed while a DOAC had already been restarted postoperatively. VKA users received conflicting information about perioperative anticoagulation management more often than DOAC users (33% versus 20%; p < 0.001). No difference was seen in postoperative coagulation-related complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Guidelines compliance in DOAC users is higher than in VKA users. Clinical decision support to help in selecting the right interruption interval in DOAC users, simplified standardized perioperative management, good coordination of instructions given to patients, and familiarity with updated guidelines are important in reducing noncompliance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient Safety in Surgery\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10116649/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient Safety in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-023-00357-w\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Safety in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-023-00357-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:遵守围手术期抗凝指南对于减少手术患者出血和血栓栓塞风险至关重要。与维生素k拮抗剂(VKAs)相比,直接口服抗凝剂(DOACs)的围手术期管理步骤更少。因此,我们假设VKA用户不遵守指南的情况高于DOAC用户。本研究的主要目的是调查使用vka和doac的老年患者不遵守围手术期抗凝管理指南的差异。次要目的是确定传达给患者的相互矛盾的信息发生的差异,以及凝血相关不良事件发生率的差异。方法:这项回顾性非对照观察队列研究调查了荷兰一家教学医院接受择期骨科手术的老年患者。所有在2016年5月1日至2020年1月1日期间接受择期骨科手术的患者,年龄在70岁及以上,使用vka或doac。非选择性手术排除在外。主要结果是不遵守围手术期抗凝治疗指南。次要结局是缺少或相互冲突的抗凝管理信息传达给患者和凝血相关不良事件。对于连续数据,使用非配对t检验,对于分类数据,使用卡方检验。结果:在使用VKA的患者中,不遵守围手术期抗凝管理其中一个步骤的比例为81%,而使用DOAC的患者为55% (p结论:DOAC使用者的指南依从性高于VKA使用者。临床决策支持,以帮助DOAC使用者选择正确的中断时间,简化标准化的围手术期管理,给予患者的指导良好的协调,以及熟悉更新的指南对于减少不遵守性是重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Compliance to perioperative anticoagulation protocols in elderly patients undergoing elective orthopedic procedures: a retrospective observational cohort study on 548 patients.

Background: Compliance with perioperative anticoagulation guidelines is essential to minimize bleeding and thromboembolic risks in patients undergoing surgery. Compared to vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs), perioperative management of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) contains fewer steps. Therefore, we hypothesized that noncompliance with guidelines in VKA users is higher than in DOAC users. The primary aim of our study was to investigate the difference in noncompliance to perioperative anticoagulant management guidelines between elderly patients using VKAs versus those using DOACs. The secondary aim was to determine the difference in occurrence of conflicting information communicated to the patients and the difference in incidence of coagulation-related adverse events.

Methods: This retrospective non-controlled observational cohort study examined elderly patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. All patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery between 1 May 2016 and 1 January 2020, aged 70 years and over, using VKAs or DOACs were selected. Nonelective surgeries were excluded. The primary outcome was the noncompliance to perioperative anticoagulant management guidelines. Secondary outcomes were missing or conflicting information on anticoagulation management communicated to the patient and coagulation-related adverse events. For continuous data, the unpaired T-test was used and for categorical data, the chi-square test.

Results: In patients using VKAs, noncompliance to one of the steps of perioperative anticoagulation management was 81%, compared to 55% in patients using DOACs (p < 0.001). In most cases, VKAs or DOACs were interrupted for longer than recommended. In 13% of patients using a VKA with perioperative bridging, bridging was not conducted as recommended in the guidelines. In 13% of patients using a DOAC, a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was prescribed while a DOAC had already been restarted postoperatively. VKA users received conflicting information about perioperative anticoagulation management more often than DOAC users (33% versus 20%; p < 0.001). No difference was seen in postoperative coagulation-related complications.

Conclusion: Guidelines compliance in DOAC users is higher than in VKA users. Clinical decision support to help in selecting the right interruption interval in DOAC users, simplified standardized perioperative management, good coordination of instructions given to patients, and familiarity with updated guidelines are important in reducing noncompliance.

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
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
The role of spinal injections towards optimizing patient selection for spinal surgery: A proof-of-concept study in 176 lower back pain patients. Implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist in resource-limited Somalia: a new standard in surgical safety. Association between postoperative complications and hospital length of stay: a large-scale observational study of 4,495,582 patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) registry. Improving surgical technical skills for emergency fixation of unstable pelvic ring fractures: an experimental study using a pelvic ring fracture simulator. Efficacy of a novel oxygen scavenger mask in reducing local oxygen concentrations below the surgical fire risk threshold: an experimental proof-of-concept study.
×
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