Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2013 Jan 2:8:1.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-1.

Strategies to enhance venous thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients (SENTRY): a pilot cluster randomized trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Strategies to enhance venous thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients (SENTRY): a pilot cluster randomized trial

Menaka Pai et al. Implement Sci. .

Abstract

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common preventable cause of mortality in hospitalized medical patients. Despite rigorous randomized trials generating strong recommendations for anticoagulant use to prevent VTE, nearly 40% of medical patients receive inappropriate thromboprophylaxis. Knowledge-translation strategies are needed to bridge this gap.

Methods: We conducted a 16-week pilot cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) to determine the proportion of medical patients that were appropriately managed for thromboprophylaxis (according to the American College of Chest Physician guidelines) within 24 hours of admission, through the use of a multicomponent knowledge-translation intervention. Our primary goal was to determine the feasibility of conducting this study on a larger scale. The intervention comprised clinician education, a paper-based VTE risk assessment algorithm, printed physicians' orders, and audit and feedback sessions. Medical wards at six hospitals (representing clusters) in Ontario, Canada were included; three were randomized to the multicomponent intervention and three to usual care (i.e., no active strategies for thromboprophylaxis in place). Blinding was not used.

Results: A total of 2,611 patients (1,154 in the intervention and 1,457 in the control group) were eligible and included in the analysis. This multicomponent intervention did not lead to a significant difference in appropriate VTE prophylaxis rates between intervention and control hospitals (appropriate management rate odds ratio = 0.80; 95% confidence interval: 0.50, 1.28; p = 0.36; intra-class correlation coefficient: 0.022), and thus was not considered feasible. Major barriers to effective knowledge translation were poor attendance by clinical staff at education and feedback sessions, difficulty locating preprinted orders, and lack of involvement by clinical and administrative leaders. We identified several factors that may increase uptake of a VTE prophylaxis strategy, including local champions, support from clinical and administrative leaders, mandatory use, and a simple, clinically relevant risk assessment tool.

Conclusions: Hospitals allocated to our multicomponent intervention did not have a higher rate of medical inpatients appropriately managed for thromboprophylaxis than did hospitals that were not allocated to this strategy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Standardized VTE risk assessment and physician order form. Legend: ACCP = American College of Chest Physicians, VTE = venous thromboembolism, COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ILD = interstitial lung disease, GI = gastrointestinal, CNS = central nervous system, INR = international normalized ratio, aPTT = activated partial thromboplastin time.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow of clusters and participants through SENTRY trial.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Anderson FA Jr, Wheeler HB, Goldberg RJ. et al.A population-based perspective of the hospital incidence and case-fatality rates of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. The Worcester DVT Study. Arch Intern Med. 1991;151:933–938. doi: 10.1001/archinte.1991.00400050081016. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Goldhaber SZ, Tapson VF. A prospective registry of 5,451 patients with ultrasound-confirmed deep vein thrombosis. Am J Cardiol. 2004;93:259–262. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2003.09.057. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Heit JA, O'Fallon WM, Petterson TM. et al.Relative impact of risk factors for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a population-based study. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:1245–1248. doi: 10.1001/archinte.162.11.1245. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Geerts WH, Bergqvist D, Pineo GF. et al.Prevention of venous thromboembolism: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition) Chest. 2008;133:381S–453S. doi: 10.1378/chest.08-0656. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shojania KG, Duncan BW, McDonald KM, Wachter RM. Making Health Care Safer: A critical analysis of patient safety practices. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment, No. 43. 2009. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Research and Quality. 22-12-2009. http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/ptsafety/ (accessed 1 Jun 2011) - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources