BACKGROUND:Trauma is a major risk factor for the development of a venous thromboembolism (VTE). After observing higher than expected VTE rates within our center's Trauma Quality Improvement Program data, we instituted a change in our VTE prophylaxis protocol, moving to enoxaparin dosing titrated by anti-Xa levels. We hypothesized that this intervention would lower our symptomatic VTE rates.
METHODS:Adult trauma patients at a single institution meeting National Trauma Data Standard criteria from April 2015 to September 2019 were examined with regards to VTE chemoprophylaxis regimen and VTE incidence. Two groups of patients were identified based on VTE protocol-those who received enoxaparin 30 mg twice daily without routine anti-Xa levels ("pre") versus those who received enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily with dose titrated by serial anti-Xa levels ("post"). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to define statistically significant differences in VTE incidence between the two cohorts.
RESULTS:There were 1698 patients within the "pre" group and 1406 patients within the "post" group. The two groups were essentially the same in terms of demographics and risk factors for bleeding or thrombosis. There was a statistically significant reduction in VTE rate ( p = 0.01) and deep vein thrombosis rate ( p = 0.01) but no significant reduction in pulmonary embolism rate ( p = 0.21) after implementation of the anti-Xa titration protocol. Risk-adjusted Trauma Quality Improvement Program data showed an improvement in rate of symptomatic pulmonary embolism from fifth decile to first decile.
CONCLUSION:A protocol titrating prophylactic enoxaparin dose based on anti-Xa levels reduced VTE rates. Implementation of this type of protocol requires diligence from the physician and pharmacist team. Further research will investigate the impact of protocol compliance and time to appropriate anti-Xa level on incidence of VTE.
The Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIM) use is a list of medications with multiple risks in older patients. Approximately 24 per cent use rate is reported in prior studies. Our objective was to determine the local PIM use and subsequent fall risk in geriatric trauma patients. We conducted a retrospective analysis of PIM use in all geriatric patients evaluated at our Level 1 trauma center between 2014 and 2017. Patients were identified from our trauma database. Pre-admission medication use was determined through medication reconciliation from our electronic medical record (EMR). Patients not undergoing medication reconciliation were excluded. After initial analysis, patients were stratified by age into three groups: 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and ≥85 years. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to calculate odds ratios of falls for specific PIMs. In all, 2181 patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 71.2 per cent of geriatric trauma patients were prescribed at least one PIM—73.1 per cent of falls compared with 68.6 per cent for other mechanisms. Specific PIM use varied by age group. PIMs associated with fall risk in all patients included antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, and diclofenac. For those aged 65 to 74 years, antihistamines, diclofenac, proton pump inhibitors, and promethazine were associated. In those aged 75 to 84 years, alprazolam, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, cyclobenzaprine, diclofenac, and muscle relaxants were implicated. No significant associations were found for patients aged ≥85 years. PIM use at our trauma center seems to be rampant and well above the national average. Geriatric falls were associated with using ≥1 PIM and multiple specific PIMs implicated. We are designing a targeted educational program for local primary care physicians (PCPs) that will attempt to decrease geriatric PIM use.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.