Implementation science approaches to optimizing venous thromboembolism prevention in patients with traumatic injuries: Findings from the 2022 Consensus Conference to Implement Optimal Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Trauma

The incidence and risk factors of proximal lower extremity deep vein thrombosis without pharmacologic prophylaxis in critically ill surgical Taiwanese patients: A prospective study

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in critically ill patients has been well-studied in Western countries. Many studies have developed risk assessments and established pharmacological protocols to prevent deep venous thrombosis (DVT). However, the DVT rate and need for pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in critically ill Taiwanese patients are limited. This study aimed to prospectively determine the DVT incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in critically ill Taiwanese patients who do not receive pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis.

Methods

We conducted a prospective study in a surgical intensive care unit (SICU) of a tertiary academic medical center in Taiwan. Adult patients admitted to SICU from March 2021 to June 2022 received proximal lower extremities DVT surveillance with venous duplex ultrasound. No patient received pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis. The outcomes were the incidence and risk factors of DVT.

Results

Among 501 enrolled SICU patients, 21 patients (4.2%) were diagnosed with proximal lower extremities DVT. In a multivariate regression analysis, hypoalbuminemia (odd ratio (OR) = 6.061, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.067-34.421), femoral central venous catheter (OR = 4.515, 95% CI: 1.547-13.174), ICU stays more than 10 days (OR = 4.017, 95% CI: 1.270-12.707), and swollen leg (OR = 3.427, 95% CI: 1.075-10.930) were independent risk factors for DVT. In addition, patients with proximal lower extremities DVT have more extended ventilator days (p = 0.045) and ICU stays (p = 0.044).

Conclusion

Our findings indicate critically ill Taiwanese patients have a higher incidence of DVT than results from prior retrospective studies in the Asian population. Physicians who care for this population should consider the specific risk factors for DVT and prescribe pharmacologic prophylaxis in high-risk groups.

Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized trauma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of implementation strategies

Introduction

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis implementation strategies are well-studied in some hospitalized medical and surgical patients. Although VTE is associated with substantial mortality and morbidity in trauma patients, implementation strategies for the prevention of VTE in trauma appear to be based on limited evidence. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature on active implementation strategies for VTE prophylaxis administration in hospitalized trauma patients and the impact on VTE events.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in adult hospitalized trauma patients to assess if active VTE prevention implementation strategies change the proportion of patients who received VTE prophylaxis, VTE events, and adverse effects such as bleeding or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia as well as hospital length of stay and the cost of care. An academic medical librarian searched Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science until December 2022.

Results

Four studies with a total of 1723 patients in the active implementation strategy group (strategies included education, reminders, human and computer alerts, audit and feedback, preprinted orders, and/or root cause analysis) and 1324 in the no active implementation strategy group (guideline creation and dissemination) were included in the analysis. A higher proportion of patients received VTE prophylaxis with an active implementation strategy (OR=2.94, 95% CI (1.68 to 5.15), p<0.01). No significant difference was found in VTE events. Quality was deemed to be low due to bias and inconsistency of studies.

Conclusions

Active implementation strategies appeared to improve the proportion of major trauma patients who received VTE prophylaxis. Further implementation studies are needed in trauma to determine effective, sustainable strategies for VTE prevention and to assess secondary outcomes such as bleeding and costs.

Level of evidence

Systematic review/meta-analysis, level III.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42023390538.

Metabolic syndrome and surgical complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 million individuals

BACKGROUND

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is characterised by the presence of at least three of the five following components: insulin resistance, obesity, chronic hypertension, elevated serum triglycerides, and decreased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations. It is estimated to affect 1 in 3 people around the globe and is reported to affect 46% of surgical patients. For people with MetS who undergo surgery, an emerging body of literature points to significantly poorer postoperative outcomes compared with nonaffected populations. The aim of this study is to review the current evidence on the risks of surgical complications in patients with MetS compared to those without MetS.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis using PRISMA and AMSTAR reporting guidelines.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 63 studies involving 1 919 347 patients with MetS and 11 248 114 patients without MetS. Compared to individuals without the condition, individuals with MetS were at an increased risk of mortality (OR 1.75 95% CI: 1.36-2.24; P <0.01); all surgical site infection types as well as dehiscence (OR 1.64 95% CI: 1.52-1.77; P <0.01); cardiovascular complications (OR 1.56 95% CI: 1.41-1.73; P <0.01) including myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiac arrest, cardiac arrythmias and deep vein thrombosis; increased length of hospital stay (MD 0.65 95% CI: 0.39-0.9; P <0.01); and hospital readmission (OR 1.55 95% CI: 1.41-1.71; P <0.01).

CONCLUSION

MetS is associated with a significantly increased risk of surgical complications including mortality, surgical site infection, cardiovascular complications, increased length of stay, and hospital readmission. Despite these risks and the high prevalence of MetS in surgical populations there is a lack of evidence on interventions for reducing surgical complications in patients with MetS. The authors suggest prioritising interventions across the surgical continuum that include (1) preoperative screening for MetS; (2) surgical prehabilitation; (3) intraoperative monitoring and management; and (4) postoperative rehabilitation and follow-up.

Research priorities in venous thromboembolism after trauma: Secondary analysis of the National Trauma Research Action Plan

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality during recovery from injury and can result in significant health care costs. Despite advances in the past several decades in our approach to VTE prophylaxis after injury, opportunities exist to improve the delivery and implementation of optimal VTE prophylaxis. Here, we aim to identify consensus research questions related to VTE across all National Trauma Research Action Plan (NTRAP) Delphi expert panels to further guide the research agenda aimed at preventing VTE after injury.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of consensus-based research priorities that were collected using a Delphi methodology by 11 unique NTRAP panels that were charged with unique topic areas across the spectrum of injury care. The database of questions was queried for the keywords "VTE," "venous thromboembo," and "DVT" and then grouped into relevant topic areas.

RESULTS

There were 86 VTE-related research questions identified across 9 NTRAP panels. Eighty-five questions reached consensus with 24 rated high priority; 60, medium priority; and 1, low priority. Questions related to the timing of VTE prophylaxis (n = 17) were most common, followed by questions related to risk factors for the development of VTE (n = 16), the effects of tranexamic acid on VTE (n = 11), the approach to dosing of pharmacologic prophylaxis (n = 8), and the pharmacologic prophylactic medication choice for optimal VTE prophylaxis (n = 6).

CONCLUSION

National Trauma Research Action Plan panelists identified 85 consensus-based research questions that should drive dedicated extramural research funding opportunities to support quality studies aimed at optimizing VTE prophylaxis after injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Proceedings from the 2022 Consensus Conference to Implement Optimal Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Trauma

ABSTRACT

On May 4 and 5, 2022, a meeting of multidisciplinary stakeholders in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after trauma was convened by the Coalition for National Trauma Research, funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health, and hosted by the American College of Surgeons in Chicago, Illinois. This consensus conference gathered more than 40 in-person and 80 virtual attendees, including trauma surgeons, other physicians, thrombosis experts, nurses, pharmacists, researchers, and patient advocates. The objectives of the meeting were twofold: (1) to review and summarize the present state of the scientific evidence regarding VTE prevention strategies in injured patients and (2) to develop consensus on future priorities in VTE prevention implementation and research gaps.To achieve these objectives, the first part of the conference consisted of talks from physician leaders, researchers, clinical champions, and patient advocates to summarize the current state of knowledge of VTE pathogenesis and prevention in patients with major injury. Video recordings of all talks and accompanying slides are freely available on the conference website ( https://www.nattrauma.org/research/research-policies-templates-guidelines/vte-conference/ ). Following this curriculum, the second part of the conference consisted of a series of small-group breakout sessions on topics potentially requiring future study. Through this process, research priorities were identified, and plans of action to develop and undertake future studies were defined.The 2022 Consensus Conference to Implement Optimal VTE Prophylaxis in Trauma answered the National Trauma Research Action Plan call to define a course for future research into preventing thromboembolism after trauma. A multidisciplinary group of clinical champions, physicians, scientists, and patients delineated clear objectives for future investigation to address important, persistent key knowledge gaps. The series of papers from the conference outlines the consensus based on the current literature and a roadmap for research to answer these unanswered questions.

Survey of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in trauma patients: current prescribing practices and concordance with clinical practice guidelines

Objectives

Pharmacological venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is recommended in the vast majority of trauma patients. The purpose of this study was to characterize current dosing practices and timing of initiation of pharmacological VTE chemoprophylaxis at trauma centers.

Methods

This was an international, cross-sectional survey of trauma providers. The survey was sponsored by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) and distributed to AAST members. The survey included 38 questions about practitioner demographics, experience, level and location of trauma center, and individual/site-specific practices regarding the dosing, selection, and timing of initiation of pharmacological VTE chemoprophylaxis in trauma patients.

Results

One hundred eighteen trauma providers responded (estimated response rate 6.9%). Most respondents were at level 1 trauma centers (100/118; 84.7%) and had >10 years of experience (73/118; 61.9%). While multiple dosing regimens were used, the most common dose reported was enoxaparin 30 mg every 12 hours (80/118; 67.8%). The majority of respondents (88/118; 74.6%) indicated adjusting the dose in patients with obesity. Seventy-eight (66.1%) routinely use antifactor Xa levels to guide dosing. Respondents at academic institutions were more likely to use guideline-directed dosing (based on the Eastern Association of the Surgery of Trauma and the Western Trauma Association guidelines) of VTE chemoprophylaxis compared with those at non-academic centers (86.2% vs 62.5%; p=0.0158) and guideline-directed dosing was reported more often if the trauma team included a clinical pharmacist (88.2% vs 69.0%; p=0.0142). Wide variability in initial timing of VTE chemoprophylaxis after traumatic brain injury, solid organ injury, and spinal cord injuries was found.

Conclusions

A high degree of variability exists in prescribing and monitoring practices for the prevention of VTE in trauma patients. Clinical pharmacists may be helpful on trauma teams to optimize dosing and increase prescribing of guideline-concordant VTE chemoprophylaxis.