Impact of Prescribing Guidelines for Inpatient Anticoagulation

Interventions for implementation of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical and surgical patients at risk for venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that using thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients at risk for VTE is safe, effective and cost-effective. Despite this, prophylactic therapies for VTE are underutilized. System-wide interventions may be more effective to improve the use of VTE prophylaxis than relying on individual providers' prescribing behaviors.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions designed to increase the implementation of thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized adult medical and surgical patients at risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE), assessed in terms of: 1. Increase in the proportion of patients who receive prophylaxis and appropriate prophylaxis 2. Reduction in risk of symptomatic VTE3. Reduction in risk of asymptomatic VTE4. Safety of the intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator (TSC) searched the Group's Specialised Register (last searched July 2010) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library) 2010, Issue 3. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases (19 April 2010) as well as the reference lists of relevant review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all studies whose interventions aimed to increase the use of prophylaxis and/or appropriate prophylaxis, decrease the proportion of symptomatic VTE, or decrease the proportion of asymptomatic VTE in hospitalized adult patients. We excluded studies that simply distributed published guidelines and studies whose interventions were not clearly described.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We collected the following outcomes: the proportion of patients who received prophylaxis (RP), the proportion of patients who received appropriate prophylaxis (RAP) (primary outcomes), and the occurrence of symptomatic VTE, asymptomatic VTE, and safety outcomes such as bleeding. We categorized interventions into education, alerts, and multifaceted interventions. We meta-analyzed RCTs and non-randomized studies (NRS) separately by random effects meta-analysis, and assessed heterogeneity using the I(2)statistic and subgroup analyses. Before analysis, we decided that results would be pooled if three or more studies were available for a particular intervention. We assessed publication bias using funnel plots and cumulative meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 55 studies. One of these reported data in patient-days and could not be quantitatively analyzed with the others. The 54 remaining studies (8 RCTs and 46 NRS) eligible for inclusion in our quantitative synthesis enrolled a total of 78,343 participants. Among RCTs, there were sufficient data to pool results for one primary outcome (received prophylaxis) for the 'alert' intervention. Alerts, such as computerized reminders or stickers on patients' charts, were associated with a risk difference (RD) of 13%, signifying an increase in the proportion of patients who received prophylaxis (95% confidence interval (CI) 1% to 25%). Among NRS, there were sufficient data to pool both primary outcomes for each intervention type. Pooled risk differences for received prophylaxis ranged from 8% to 17%, and for received appropriate prophylaxis ranged from 11% to 19%. Education and alerts were associated with statistically significant increases in prescription of appropriate prophylaxis, and multifaceted interventions were associated with statistically significant increases in prescription of any prophylaxis and appropriate prophylaxis. Multifaceted interventions had the largest pooled effects. I(2) results showed substantial statistical heterogeneity which was in part explained by patient types and type of hospital. A subgroup analysis showed that multifaceted interventions which included an alert may be more effective at improving rates of prophylaxis and appropriate prophylaxis than those without an alert. Results for VTE and safety outcomes did not show substantial benefits or harms, although most studies were underpowered to assess these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We reviewed a large number of studies which implemented a variety of system-wide strategies aimed to improve thromboprophylaxis rates in many settings and patient populations. We found statistically significant improvements in prescription of prophylaxis associated with alerts (RCTs) and multifaceted interventions (RCTs and NRS), and improvements in prescription of appropriate prophylaxis in NRS with the use of education, alerts and multifaceted interventions. Multifaceted interventions with an alert component may be the most effective. Demonstrated sources of heterogeneity included patient types and type of hospital. The results of our review will help physicians, nurses, pharmacists, hospital administrators and policy makers make practical decisions about local adoption of specific system-wide measures to improve prevention of VTE, an important public health issue. We did not find a significant benefit for VTE outcomes; however, earlier RCTs assessing the efficacy of thromboprophylaxis which were powered to address these outcomes have demonstrated the benefit of prophylactic therapies and a favourable balance of benefits versus the increased risk of bleeding events.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism and safe use of heparin in Spanish hospitals

OBJECTIVE

To assess compliance with basic and actionable indicators in relation to prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and safe use of heparin.

DESIGN

We built, pilot tested and measured a set of evidence-based structure (existence of guidelines) and process (risk assessment for VTE, and dose adjustment to patient weight and renal function when prescribing heparin) indicators in a nation-wide random sample of 22 hospitals. Compliance with process indicators is estimated at national level and by groups of hospitals (stratified by size). At hospital level, compliance is assessed with Lot Quality Acceptance Sampling, for 85% compliance standard (α ≤ 0.05), 55% threshold (β ≤ 0.10). Contents of existing guidelines are analyzed, and their influence on performance is assessed using logistic regression.

SETTING

Acute care hospitals in Spain.

INTERVENTIONS

None

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Problem identification through indicators assessment.

RESULTS

Less than half of hospitals have guidelines and their contents are very variable and incomplete. No hospital complies with the standard for VTE prevention and only one for heparin dose adjustment. Nationally, VTE risk assessment is performed in 5.8% of patients (95% CI: 5.6-6.0), and heparin dose is explicitly adjusted in 17.5% (95% CI: 16.8-18.2). Performance is relatively higher in large hospitals and it is associated with the existence of guidelines for VTE prevention (OR: 8.3; 95% CI: 2.1-32.1).

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified some actionable contributing factors to safety problems using evidence-based structure and process indicators. Explicit process design and key clinical interventions (risk assessment for VTE and heparin dose adjustment) should be addressed to improve the current situation.

The use of benzodiazepine monotherapy for major depression before and after implementation of guidelines for benzodiazepine use

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The Department of Health (DOH) in Taiwan issued the 'Guidelines for Benzodiazepine Use in Sedation and Hypnosis' in March 2004, which clearly stated that benzodiazepines (BZDs) should not be used alone for the treatment of depression. However, the extent to which clinicians comply with the BZD guidelines was not known. This study aimed to evaluate whether sole prescribing of BZDs for major depression decreased after the implementation of the BZD guidelines.

METHODS

This was a retrospective longitudinal trend analysis by analyzing the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) from September 2002 to September 2005. The LHID contains all claims data from a random sample of 1,000,000 beneficiaries of the universal National Health Insurance programme in Taiwan. The 3-year study period was divided equally into six periods, before and after the implementation of the guidelines respectively. For each period, the proportion of patients with major depression (ICD-9-CM code 296.2x, 296.3x) treated with BZDs without any concomitant antidepressant was calculated in order to conduct a trend analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 5463 prescriptions of BZDs solely used for major depression were observed in the entire study period. In more than 80% of the BZD prescriptions in which BZDs were used alone for major depression, they were prescribed at doses higher than one prescribed daily dose/defined daily dose and were supplied for more than 7 days. The number of outpatients with major depression ranged from 2137 to 3326 during the 12 periods. The proportion of depressed patients treated with BZDs alone per 3 months (i.e., the non-compliance rate) fluctuated from 6·7% to 9·4% before implementation of the guidelines, and from 8·0% to 9·4% after implementation, in outpatient settings. In addition, the guideline non-adherence rates in inpatient settings varied from 7·0% to 11·8% and from 7·8% to 12·6% before and after the implementation of the BZD guidelines respectively. Further trend analyses indicated that the implementation of the guidelines was not associated with a reduced rate of sole prescribing of BZDs for major depression in either inpatient (P = 0·083) or outpatient settings (P = 0·925).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The formulation and implementation of the BZD guidelines appear not to be associated with a reduced rate of sole prescribing of BZDs for major depression, and more comprehensive efforts are required.

Venous thromboembolism prevention: a systematic review of methods to improve prophylaxis and decrease events in the hospitalized patient

Prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is currently a key initiative internationally and in US hospitals, where there has been a recent focus on national quality initiatives to prevent hospital-acquired VTE. Multiple strategies exist to prevent VTE by increasing prophylaxis rates in the hospitalized setting. Active, multifaceted interventions, including provider education, an active reminder to the provider, and regular audit and feedback to medical and hospital staff, appear to be the most effective current interventions. Active intervention programs have been validated both as electronic alerts, with or without computerized clinical decision support software and, more recently, human alerts, many of which utilize in-hospital pharmacists. A passive strategy, such as guideline dissemination, should not be used as a lone method. Although inappropriate duration remains a key reason as to why at-risk patients do not receive appropriate thromboprophylaxis within the hospital (defined by type, dose, and duration of prophylaxis), few studies address duration compared with hospital length of stay. Preventable VTE is a new quality outcome measure for hospitals but is measured in few studies. Future studies should focus on comparing various multifaceted interventions to assess their effect over time, including endpoints of bleeding for safety, appropriate type, dose, and duration of prophylaxis, overall and preventable VTE, and the impact on unnecessary prophylaxis for patients not at risk.

Economic burden of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients

Venous thromboembolism, a condition that includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a significant medical problem that affects more than 1 million patients each year. In addition to the immense impact of venous thromboembolism on morbidity and mortality, the economic burden of the disease is considerable, costing the health care system in the United States more than $1.5 billion/year. The cost of managing an initial episode of deep vein thrombosis is estimated at $7712-10,804, and for an initial pulmonary embolism event $9566-16,644. Management of acute venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer costs more than $20,000. Although much of the costs of venous thromboembolism are associated with managing the acute event, there are also significant costs associated with its long-term complications such as recurrent venous thromboembolism, postthrombotic syndrome, and pulmonary hypertension. Data from numerous robust clinical trials have demonstrated that with appropriate prophylaxis, many of these venous thromboembolism events can be prevented in both surgical and medical patients. Even though the strong evidence supporting venous thromboembolism prophylaxis spans several decades, a number of large American and global registries have documented very poor use of appropriate venous thromboprophylaxis. Because of increasing regulatory requirements, hospitals nationwide are developing necessary documentation of appropriate venous thromboembolism prophylaxis programs for both surgical and medical patients. Hospitals and clinicians must have a firm understanding of not only the clinical impact but also the economic impact of failing to use appropriate prophylaxis and of the cost-effectiveness of different venous thromboprophylaxis methods.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism: a key patient safety priority

It is more than 50 years since the first publication of a study showing that symptomatic and fatal venous thromboembolism could be reduced with the use of thromboprophylaxis. Furthermore, it is 23 years since the first evidence-based guidelines recommended routine use of thromboprophylaxis for most hospitalized patients. However, despite the overwhelming evidence that thromboprophylaxis safely and inexpensively reduces thromboembolic complications associated with acute illness and surgery, there continue to be large gaps in the provision of this key patient safety intervention and even larger gaps in the provision of optimal thromboprophylaxis. The implementation of quality improvement strategies, both at the national level and in local hospitals, are able to increase awareness of thromboembolic risks, to increase adherence to thromboprophylaxis guidelines, and to decrease both clinically important thromboembolic events and hospital costs. Therefore, the objective is for every hospitalized patient to receive appropriate thromboprophylaxis based on their thromboembolic and bleeding risks.

Bridging the gap between evidence and practice in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: the quality improvement process

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is considered to be the most common preventable cause of hospital-related death. Hospitalized patients undergoing major Surgery and hospitalized patients with acute medical illness have an increased risk of VTE. Although there is overwhelming evidence for the need and efficacy of VTE prophylaxis in patients at risk, only about a third of those who are at risk of VTE receive appropriate prophylaxis. To address the shortfall in VTE prophylaxis, the US Joint Commission and the National Quality Forum (NQF) endorse standardized VTE prophylaxis practices, and are identifying and testing measures to monitor these standards. Hospitals in the USA accredited by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to receive medicare patients will need VTE prophylaxis programs in place to conform to these national consensus standards. This review aims to give background information on initiatives to improve the prevention of VTE and to identify key features of a successful quality improvement strategy for prevention of VTE in the hospital. A literature review shows that the key features of effective quality improvement strategies includes an active strategy, a multifaceted approach, and a continuous iterative process of audit and feedback. Risk assessment models may be helpful for deciding which patients should receive prophylaxis and for matching VTE risk with the appropriate intensity of prophylaxis. This approach should assist in implementing the NQF/Joint Commission-endorsed standards, as well as increase the use of appropriate VTE prophylaxis.

Survey of hospitals for guidelines, policies, and protocols for anticoagulants

PURPOSE

A survey of community hospitals that are part of a national group purchasing organization (GPO) was conducted to assess the formulary status of currently available anticoagulants, assess the current status of anticoagulant prescribing guidelines and the existing scope of such guidelines, and identify perceptions about the appropriateness of the use of anticoagulants in community hospitals in the United States.

METHODS

A Web-based survey of acute care hospitals that were members of a leading health care resource management and GPO was conducted. The survey was sent to 224 hospitals.

RESULTS

Of 224 hospitals, 127 participated in the survey, a response rate of 59.6%. Warfarin, unfractionated heparin (UFH), and enoxaparin were the anticoagulants most commonly included (>80%) on the hospitals' drug formularies. Guidelines relating to the use of UFH and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) existed in approximately 87.4% and 55.1% of responding hospitals, respectively, followed by warfarin and direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) (approximately 44.1% and 30.7%, respectively). Among hospitals without guidelines, 78.2%, 72.1%, 65.4%, 50.0%, and 41.4% reported that such guidelines would be useful if they included LMWHs, warfarin, DTIs, UFH, and fondaparinux, respectively. Guidelines for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE), appropriate drug selection, and dosing for VTE prophylaxis and treatment existed in 59.8%, 53.5%, and 43.3% of the hospitals, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The study found that a sizable percentage of the responding community hospitals did not have guidelines, protocols, or policies related to the use of anticoagulants. Further, those hospitals without such guidelines commonly reported a need for clinical practice guidelines.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis guidelines: Use by primary care physicians

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), a prevalent, costly medical condition, is one of the most common causes of death in the United States. Although risk factors for VTE are well known, thromboembolic events cannot be predicted because patients are asymptomatic and screening methods have limitations. Anticoagulant therapy (eg, low-molecular-weight heparin, unfractionated heparin, selective factor Xa inhibitors) has proved effective for preventing thromboembolism, including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. While quality care for VTE entails prophylaxis for all relevant patients, many high-risk patients are undertreated or treated incorrectly. Both primary and secondary prevention of VTE remain inadequate for several reasons, including lack of awareness of the American College of Chest Physicians guidelines, of the seriousness of VTE, of the benefits of prophylaxis, and of the relatively low risk of bleeding complications. To provide appropriate treatment, physicians must assess the numbers and types of risk factors for each patient, the underlying illness or surgical procedure, and the benefits and risks of possible therapies. The problem of VTE will grow as the US population ages, as surgery is performed on increasingly sick patients, and as the length of hospital stays continues to decrease.