Effectiveness of a Patient Education Bundle on Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Administration by Sex

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent cause of preventable harm among hospitalized patients. Many prescribed prophylaxis doses are not administered despite supporting evidence. We previously demonstrated a patient-centered education bundle improved VTE prophylaxis administration broadly; howeve...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of surgical research 2022-12, Vol.280, p.151-162
Main Authors: Owodunni, Oluwafemi P., Lau, Brandyn D., Wang, Jiangxia, Shaffer, Dauryne L., Kraus, Peggy S., Holzmueller, Christine G., Aboagye, Jonathan K., Hobson, Deborah B., Varasteh Kia, Mujan, Armocida, Stephanie, Streiff, Michael B., Haut, Elliott R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Anticoagulants - adverse effects
Deep venous thrombosis
Delivery of Health Care
Female
Hospitalization
Humans
Male
Missed doses
Patient education
Patient Education as Topic
Pulmonary embolism
Quality improvement
Venous thromboembolism
Venous Thromboembolism - prevention & control
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent cause of preventable harm among hospitalized patients. Many prescribed prophylaxis doses are not administered despite supporting evidence. We previously demonstrated a patient-centered education bundle improved VTE prophylaxis administration broadly; however, patient-specific factors driving nonadministration are unclear. We examine the effects of the education bundle on missed doses of VTE prophylaxis by sex. We performed a post-hoc analysis of a nonrandomized controlled trial to evaluate the differences in missed doses by sex. Pre-intervention and intervention periods for patients admitted to 16 surgical and medical floors between 10/2014-03/2015 (pre-intervention) and 04/2015-12/2015 (intervention) were compared. We examined the conditional odds of (1) overall missed doses, (2) missed doses due to patient refusal, and (3) missed doses for other reasons. Overall, 16,865 patients were included (pre-intervention 6853, intervention 10,012), with 2350 male and 2460 female patients (intervention), and 6373 male and 5682 female patients (control). Any missed dose significantly reduced on the intervention floors among male (odds ratio OR 0.55; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.44-0.70, P 
ISSN:0022-4804
1095-8673
1095-8673
DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2022.07.015