Model-Guided Decision-Making for Thromboprophylaxis and Hospital-Acquired Thromboembolic Events Among Hospitalized Children and Adolescents

Abstract

ImportanceRates of hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (HA-VTE) are increasing among pediatric patients. Identifying at-risk patients for whom prophylactic interventions should be considered remains challenging.ObjectiveTo determine whether use of a previously validated HA-VTE prognostic model, together with pediatric hematologist review, could reduce pediatric inpatient rates of HA-VTE.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis pragmatic randomized clinical trial was performed from November 2, 2020, through January 31, 2022, at a single-center academic children’s hospital (Monroe Carell Jr Children’s Hospital at Vanderbilt). All pediatric hospital admissions (aged <22 years) under inpatient status were included and randomized.InterventionAll patients had an HA-VTE probability automatically calculated daily, which was visible to the hematology research team for patients in the intervention group. Patients with an elevated risk (predicted probability ≥2.5%) underwent additional medical record review by the research team to determine eligibility for thromboprophylaxis.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was rate of HA-VTE. Secondary outcomes included rates of prophylactic anticoagulation and anticoagulation-associated bleeding events.ResultsA total of 17 427 hospitalizations met eligibility criteria, were randomized, and were included in the primary analysis: patients had a median (IQR) age of 1.7 (0 to 11.1) years; there were 9143 (52.5%) female patients and 8284 (47.5%) male patients, and there were 445 (2.6%) Asian patients, 2739 (15.9%) Black patients, and 11 752 (67.4%) White patients. The 2 groups were evenly balanced in number (8717 in the intervention group and 8710 in the control group) and patient characteristics. A total of 58 patients (0.7%) in the control group and 77 (0.9%) in the intervention group developed HA-VTE (risk difference: 2.2 per 1000 patients; 95% CI, −0.4 to 4.8 per 1000 patients; P = .10). Recommendations to initiate thromboprophylaxis were accepted by primary clinical teams 25.8% of the time (74 of 287 hospitalizations). Minor bleeding events were rare among patients who received anticoagulation (3 of 74 [4.1%]), and no major bleeding events were observed during the study period. Among patients randomized to the control group, the model exhibited high discrimination accuracy (C statistic, 0.799, 95% CI, 0.725 to 0.856).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this randomized clinical trial of the use of a HA-VTE prognostic model to reduce pediatric inpatient rates of HA-VTE, despite the use of an accurate and validated prognostic model for HA-VTE, there was substantial reluctance by primary clinical teams to initiate thromboprophylaxis as recommended. In this context, rates of HA-VTE between the control and intervention groups were not different. Future research is needed to identify improved strategies for prevention of HA-VTE and to overcome clinician concerns regarding thromboprophylaxis.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04574895

Implementable Prediction of Pressure Injuries in Hospitalized Adults: Model Development and Validation

“…Table 1 provides a summary of the extracted features. Missing values were imputed with the cohort median [ 46 47 ]. Multimedia Appendix 1 provides the full cohort characteristics, including missing values and a full list of measures.…”

Artificial Intelligence for Improved Patient Outcomes—The Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial Is the Secret Sauce

“…What needs to change? In one word: “Randomization.” The excuses for why randomization is not an option are plentiful and roll off the tongue, yet in our experience, the excuses frequently turn out to be unjustified [ 2 5 6 ]. The reason that we have safe and effective prescription drugs in the US is that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) demands evidence from rigorous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and would never consider the excuses used for not randomizing that are tolerated in the AI field.…”

“…Some will argue that the RCT will take many years to complete, and with the fast-moving developments in AI, informatics, and technology, this is an unacceptable pace. We have demonstrated, however, that pragmatic RCTs can be performed rapidly [ 6 7 8 9 ] and are a superior option to weaker study designs. Speed and rigor are not mutually exclusive; in fact, rigor nearly always increases the speed of introducing new methods to medicine in a responsible and ethical way.…”

Reducing Pediatric Hospital-Acquired Venous Thromboembolism—Overcoming Challenges Using Quality Improvement

“…1 Walker and colleagues 2 performed a randomized clinical trial to assess the effect of an intervention to decrease pediatric HA-VTE based on an electronic medical record (EMR)-driven algorithm, titled the Children's Likelihood of Thrombosis (CLOT) trial. 2 The primary outcome was the incidence of imaging-confirmed HA-VTE during hospitalization. The study population consisted of 17 838 pediatric admissions to a large, tertiary care children's hospital.…”

“…What were the barriers? eTable 6 in Supplement 2 of the article by Walker et al 2 shows that the most common reason the primary team rejected recommendations was "physician preference" (119 of 225 [53%]). A sentence from the Discussion is illustrative: "Clinicians and clinical teams often voiced strong acceptance or opposition to thromboprophylaxis recommendations."…”