4.3 Article

Physician compliance with guidelines for deep-vein thrombosis prevention in total hip and knee arthroplasty

期刊

CURRENT MEDICAL RESEARCH AND OPINION
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 87-97

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1185/030079907X242746

关键词

ACCP guidelines; compliance; total hip arthroplasty; total knee arthroplasty; venous thromhoembolism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Despite evidence-based guidelines for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention after total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA), many patients may not receive effective prophylaxis. Our objective was to analyze data from the multinational Global Orthopedic Registry (GLORY) to evaluate the compliance of surgeons with the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines for VTE prevention. Research design and methods: Data from 8160 patients who had undergone a primary, unilateral, elective THA (n = 3950) or TKA (n = 4210), and had at least 3 months of follow-up were analyzed. Results: Almost all patients received a form of recommended prophylaxis. Compliance with guidelines in terms of type, duration, start time, and dose was achieved for 47% of THA and 61% of TKA patients in the USA, and 62% of THA and 69% of TKA patients outside the USA. Warfarin use, mostly in the USA, was fully compliant in 33% of THA and 48% of TKA patients. Low-molecular-weight heparin use was fully compliant in 63% of THA and 72% of TKA patients in the USA, and 67% of THA and 73% of TKA patients outside the USA. Conclusion: Although almost all THA and TKA patients both inside and outside the USA received prophylaxis, a large proportion did not receive treatment in accordance with the ACCP guidelines. Our study may have overestimated the use of recommended prophylaxis as some participating investigators may have had a specific interest in VTE prophylaxis. Furthermore, although analyses were restricted to approximately three-quarters of patients who had outpatient follow-up data, their characteristics were similar to those in the entire population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据