Observational analysis improved accuracy of vte prophylaxis prescribing in emergency surgeries, suggesting effective education aids.
Aims To improve the completion of VTE risk Assessments, and accuracy of VTE prophylaxis prescribing in line with unit guidance Methods Data was collected over 2 three week periods for Monday and Thursday takes (8/4/24-25/4/24 and 2/12/24-19/12/24). Cases were assessed based on the completion and accuracy of the VTE risk assessment, accuracy of doses, regimen and timing of prescribing, and prescribing of a one-off (STAT) dose if appropriate. Statistical testing was done using Chi-Square. Patients were excluded if assessment or prescribing was done by another team, if the patient was clerked by an auditor, and if pharmacological anticoagulation is contraindicated. Education sessions were provided to explain the importance of accurate assessments and prescribing. Written guidelines were compiled and included in FY1 and CT handbooks. Results Round 1 (n = 63) Round 2 (n = 84) P Value VTE Risk Assessment completed 57 (90.5%) 73 (86.9%) 0.68 Of completed assessments, correct assessments and prescribing 57 (100%) 68 (93.2%) 0.12 Appropriate timing of recurring pharmacological prophylaxis 27 (42.9%) 52 (61.9%) 0.03 * Number of cases where STAT dose required 24 20 - Of required STAT doses, cases where STAT doses prescribed 19 (79.2%) 13 (65%) 0.48 Cases completely accurate 24 (38.1%) 47 (56.0%) 0.04 * Conclusion Through multiple teaching sessions and the introduction of written guidelines in the unit workspace and handbooks, we successfully increased the proportion of time-appropriate VTE prophylaxis prescribing as well as the overall accuracy of VTE risk assessments and prophylaxis prescriptions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kapur et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: