Scientific publications
Prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients admitted from Spanish emergency departments: the PROTESU II study
César Rincón Díaz 1 , Sònia Jiménez Hernández 2 , Fahd Beddar Chaib 3 , Ana Isabel Condon Abanto 4 , María Cortés Ayaso 5 , Laura Lozano Polo 6 , Leticia Guirado Torrecillas 7 , Héctor Alonso Valle 8 , Mónica Olid Velilla 1 , David Jiménez 9 , Ramón Lecumberri 10 , Pedro Ruiz Artacho 11 ; Grupo de trabajo de Enfermedad Tromboembólica Venosa de la Sociedad Española de Medicina de Urgencias y Emergencias (ETV-SEMES)*
Objective: To estimate the prevalence of inappropriate use of prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with medical diseases admitted to hospital from the emergency department. To explore variables associated with inappropriate thromboprophylaxis.
Methods: Prospective multicenter cohort study in 15 hospital emergency departments. We included patients admitted for a medical condition during 7 days in the first quarter of 2022. We assessed risk for VTE with the Padua Prediction Score (PPS). Inappropriate thromboprophylaxis was defined by failure to prescribe prophylaxis in patients with a high-risk PPS assessment unless there were absolute contraindications (active bleeding or severe thrombopenia) or, alternatively, the prescription of prophylaxis in patients with a low-risk PPS assessment or absolute contraindications. A logistic regression model was adjusted for risk level to identify variables associated with inappropriate use of thromboprophylaxis.
Results: Of a total of 630 patients included, 450 (71.4%) had PPS scores indicating high risk for VTE; 180 patients were at low risk. Thromboprophylaxis was inappropriate in 248 patients (39.4%): 165 high-risk patients who received no prophylaxis, 82 low-risk patients who were nonetheless treated, and 1 patient who was treated in spite of severe thrombopenia. Odds ratios (ORs) revealed that the variables associated with inappropriate use of thromboprophylaxis were trauma or recent surgery (OR, 5.53; 95% CI, 1.58-19.34), presence of factors indicating risk for bleeding (OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.44-4.73), and hospital admission for either urinary tract infection (OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.07-4.87) or gastrointestinal disease (OR, 4.30; 95% CI, 1.71-10.85).
Conclusions: The inappropriate use of thromboprophylaxis in Spanish emergency departments is high and associated with certain clinical characteristics.
CITATION Emergencias. 2024 Jun;36(4):271-280. doi: 10.55633/s3me/051.2024
Our authors
