MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2597498378 · doi:10.1182/blood.v116.21.82.82

Rate of Late Venous Thromboembolism Events In High-Risk Medical Patients

2010· article· en· W2597498378 on OpenAlexaffabout
Russell D. Hull, Duane Bates, Cynthia Brocklebank, Nelly Komari, Tazmin Merali

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreSanofi (Canada)Alberta HealthUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Medical recordPopulationVenous thromboembolismEmergency departmentPediatricsEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineThrombosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 82 Background: Current guidelines recommend that venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis should be given to high-risk medical inpatients based on evidence of reduced VTE events and reduced mortality. However, current guidelines do not specify the appropriate length of VTE prophylaxis in this population, especially after discharge. The EXCLAIM study showed a 90 day VTE incidence of 4.2% in those patients who received enoxaparin for 10 days in the hospital, with 1.1% being symptomatic VTE. However, real world data is needed to understand the risk of VTE for this patient population after they are discharged from acute care and the prevalence of symptomatic VTE. Objective: To determine the incidence of late VTE events in high-risk medical patients in every day clinical practice and in the absence of systematic screening for VTE. Methods: Charts from 1134 consecutive high-risk medical patients who were hospitalized in the Calgary region and discharged between January and February 2008 were abstracted using standardized case record forms. All hospitals in the region use a common unique patient identifier number, thus enabling the tracking of subsequent patient visits to the emergency room, inpatient admissions or outpatient visits occurring anywhere in the region's acute care system. High-risk medical patients were defined as age > 60 years and having at least one of the following risk factors: malignancy, respiratory illness, neurological illness, inflammatory bowel disease, previous VTE, acute infection or heart failure. Records excluded were those of patients who were admitted for VTE or to rule out VTE, those receiving chronic anticoagulation, those with acute coronary syndromes, patients whose hospital stay was ≤ 3 days, surgical patients, orthopedic patients, and pregnant patients. Data was collected on patient risk factors, thromboprophylaxis received in hospital and at discharge, VTE related events for up to 100 days post discharge. Results: 989 patients met criteria over the review period. 74% (733/989) of all patients received mechanical or pharmacological prophylaxis in hospital: 28% (281) received unfractionated heparin, 28% (281) received LMWH and 4% (40) received mechanical prophylaxis and 13% (131) received a combination of modalities. The prevailing medical risk factors were malignancy (46%), respiratory illness (44%), neurological illness (15%), inflammatory bowel disease (6%), previous VTE (4%), acute infection (17%), heart failure (9%). Only 2% (95% CI, 1.6% to 3.6%) of all patients received anticoagulation prophylaxis at discharge. Twenty one percent of patients in the population studied received medical care for symptoms associated with VTE. Of these, 4% (95% CI, 2.7% to 5.2%) had confirmation of VTE by diagnostic testing while the other 17% (95% CI, 15.0% to 19.8%) had diagnostic tests that were negative or inconclusive. The mean length of time to confirmed VTE was 34.1 days post hospital admission. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that in a real life setting 21% of high-risk patients would develop symptoms of VTE requiring a health professional's attention with 4% having VTE confirmed by diagnostic testing. These events occurred despite prophylaxis in hospital and suggest that the risk of symptomatic VTE could be higher in real life compared to that reported in randomized clinical trials where patients are screened for asymptomatic VTE. These findings show that the prevalence of VTE warrants consideration of extended thromboprophylaxis in selected high-risk medical patients, as the benefits of extended prophylactic therapy may outweigh the risks in this population. Disclosures: Hull: sanofi-aventis Canada Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding. Brocklebank:sanofi-aventis Canada Inc: Honoraria; Bayer, Inc.: Honoraria; Leo Pharma: Honoraria. Komari:sanofi-aventis Canada Inc: Employment. Merali:sanofi-aventis Canada Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→