E-ISSN: 1308-5263
Effectiveness of Sequential Compression Devices in Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Medically Ill Hospitalized Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study [Turk J Hematol]
Turk J Hematol. Ahead of Print: TJH-30906 | DOI: 10.4274/tjh.galenos.2019.2018.0413  

Effectiveness of Sequential Compression Devices in Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Medically Ill Hospitalized Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Prajwal Dhakal1, Ling Wang2, Joseph Gardiner3, Shiva Shrotriya2, Mukta Sharma2, Supratik Rayamajhi2
1Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Oncology and Hematology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE; Fred and Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE
2Department of Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
3Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

Objective: To evaluate effectiveness of sequential compression devices (SCD) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention in medically ill hospitalized patients.
Methods: Adult patients admitted to a teaching hospital from April 2015 and March 2016 were included. Patients on anticoagulants with or without SCD were excluded. We analyzed VTE risk, length of hospital stay, and other co-morbidities among propensity score-matched patients on SCD and no thromboprophylaxis (NONE).
Results: Among 30,824 patients, 67 patients (0.22%) developed VTE during the hospital stay: DVT in 55 and PE in 12. VTE was seen in 47 out of 20,018 patients on SCD (41 DVT, 6 PE) and 20 out of 10,819 patients on NONE (14 DVT, 6 PE). Risk- adjusted analysis showed no significant difference in VTE incidence in SCD group compared to NONE. (Odds Ratio 0.99, 95% Confidence Interval 0.57-1.73, p=0.74).
Conclusion: SCD, compared to NONE, is not associated with decreased VTE incidence during hospital stay.





Corresponding Author: Supratik Rayamajhi, Türkiye


TOOLS
Uncorrected Full Text PDF
Print
Download citation
RIS
EndNote
BibTex
Medlars
Procite
Reference Manager
Share with email
Share
Send email to author

Similar articles
PubMed
Google Scholar


 



Impact Factor (2018) = 0.779