Skip to main content

01.11.2010 | Ausgabe 4/2010

Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 4/2010

Variation in physician deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis attitudes and practices at an academic tertiary care center

Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis > Ausgabe 4/2010
Erin M. Galbraith, Bonnie M. Vautaw, Mary Grzybowski, Peter K. Henke, Tomas W. Wakefield, James B. Froehlich
Wichtige Hinweise
This study was not funded and the authors thus have no affiliations to disclose.


Background Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) remains a major cause of in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Effective DVT prophylaxis is available but underutilized. We sought to describe physician understanding of DVT epidemiology and prophylaxis practices. Methods All medical and surgical residents, and hospitalist attendings were invited to participate in an on-line survey. Physicians were queried about DVT epidemiology, risk factors, prophylaxis practices, and complications. Means and standard deviations were calculated for ordinal responses. χ2 was used for dichotomous variables. Results Of 281 doctors emailed, 69/160 (43%) medical residents, 26/72 (36%) surgical residents, and 21/49 (43%) hospitalist attendings participated. All three overestimated DVT incidence and morbidity. Surgical residents listed paralysis as high risk and minor surgery as a low/no risk factor. Medical residents thought heart failure and varicose veins were low/no risk for developing DVT. Regarding prophylaxis, surgical residents did not identify ambulation as a prophylactic measure, and were more likely to use SCDs, compression stockings, and enoxaparin, while medical residents and hospitalist attendings prescribed unfractionated heparin most frequently. Medical residents reported that they would hold anticoagulants for comorbidities most frequently, but all 3 groups agreed that anticoagulant prophylaxis would not significantly increase bleeding risks. Conclusions Perceptions of DVT risk factors and prophylaxis practices vary by both physician specialty and attending/resident status. Prophylaxis practice differences may result from these perceptions.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf Zusätzlich können Sie eine Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl in gedruckter Form beziehen – ohne Aufpreis.

Weitere Produktempfehlungen anzeigen
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2010

Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 4/2010 Zur Ausgabe
  1. Das kostenlose Testabonnement läuft nach 14 Tagen automatisch und formlos aus. Dieses Abonnement kann nur einmal getestet werden.

Neu im Fachgebiet Kardiologie

Mail Icon II Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Kardiologie und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.