2016
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-016-0078-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Wells criteria for DVT is a reliable clinical tool to assess the risk of deep venous thrombosis in trauma patients

Abstract: BackgroundDeep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) is a common complication in trauma patients. Venous duplex surveillance is used widely for the diagnosis of DVT, however, there is controversy concerning its appropriate use. The Wells criterion is a clinically validated scoring system in an outpatient setting, but its use in trauma patients has not been studied. This study evaluated the application of the Wells scoring system in trauma population.MethodsWells scores were calculated retrospectively for all patients who were… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
74
0
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(80 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
3
74
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…We developed the Himi score for risk assessment for the onset of DVT by using factors that multivariate analysis showed to be significantly related to DVT, and compared the accuracy of this score with those of the Wells and Padua scores. Consistent with the score ranges reported in previous studies (Wells: 0.9–2.38; Padua: 2–4.56), the average Wells and Padua scores were 1.39 and 3.21, respectively . However, the AUC of the Himi score was significantly higher than those of Wells and Padua scores.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…We developed the Himi score for risk assessment for the onset of DVT by using factors that multivariate analysis showed to be significantly related to DVT, and compared the accuracy of this score with those of the Wells and Padua scores. Consistent with the score ranges reported in previous studies (Wells: 0.9–2.38; Padua: 2–4.56), the average Wells and Padua scores were 1.39 and 3.21, respectively . However, the AUC of the Himi score was significantly higher than those of Wells and Padua scores.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Risk stratification for decision‐making has evolved into important tools for medical practitioners in both clinical and research settings, where they are applied to the prevention of illness, avoidance of complications, and slowing of disease progression. This has led to the development of validated and well‐established scoring systems, such as those employed in the risk assessment for annual embolic stroke from atrial fibrillation (Hsu et al ., ), of coronary events associated with dyslipidaemia (Preiss & Kristensen, ), and of deep vein thrombosis and its complications, such as pulmonary emboli (Modi et al ., ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The results also showed that 2 patients in the control group who were detected as being at risk were diagnosed with DVT using Wells score, while none of the subjects in intervention group experienced DVT. Similarly, Modi et al showed a linear relationship between the Wells score and the incidence of DVT in such way that there is no risk of developing DVT if the patient is in a low-risk group based on the Wells scoring instrument (<1), and there is likelihood of DVT if (s)he is placed in the medium-or high-risk groups [26]. Dybowska et al's study also showed that the use of Wells score in primary care shows a high degree of accuracy [27].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%