Computerized order entry sets and intensive education improve the rate of prophylaxis for deep vein thrombophlebitis

Daniela Levi, Y. Kupfter, C. Seneviratne, S. Tessler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Prophylactic measures to prevent deep vein thrombophlebitis (DVT) have been shown to be successful. Recent studies have shown, however, that they are underutilized; only 35-55% of eligible patients actually receive prophylaxis. We prospectively studied the effectiveness of intensive education and the use of computerized order entry sets in improving the use of DVT prophylaxis in critically ill patients. Methods: All patients admitted to the intensive care units between July 1, 1997 and April 30, 1998 were evaluated. Patients requiring full anticoagulation were excluded. Unit A was the control unit; the staff were not intensively educated nor were computerized order sets available. In Unit B, the staff were intensively educated regarding the risks and benefits of DVT prophylaxis and in Unit C, the staff were both educated and required to use standardized computer entry sets which included DVT prophylaxis. Patients who were having acute bleeding or who were severely thrombocytopenic (platelet count < 50,000) were not supposed to receive heparin. Patients were randomly admitted to the three Units. Results: A total of 2,436 patients were admitted during this period; 609 required full anticoagulation and were excluded. 1,827 patients were evaluated; the mean age was 76.4 (±10.5) and was similar for all three Units. 645 patients were admitted to Unit A (control); 245 (38%) were appropriately prophylaxed; 390 (60.5%) did not receive prophylaxis and 10 (1.6%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. In Unit B, 584 patients were admitted; 362 (62%) received appropriate prophylaxis, 213 (36.5%) did not receive prophylaxis and 9 (1.5%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. In Unit C, 598 patients were admitted; 58 (97.2%) were appropriately given prophylaxis, 7 (1.2%) did not receive prophylaxis and 10 (1.7%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. The rate of appropriate prophylaxis was significantly improved by education alone (62% vs 38.1% {P = 0.01) and even more by the use of computerized order sets (97.2% vs 38% {P = 0.0001} and 97.2% vs 62% {P = 0.01}). The rate of inappropriate use of heparin was the same in all three groups. Conclusions: The combination of intensive education plus the mandatory use of computerized order sets results in almost universal DVT prophylaxis. Clinical Implications: The use of computerized order sets may improve therapy in conditions with accepted therapeutic protocols.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalChest
Volume114
Issue number4 SUPPL.
StatePublished - Oct 1998

Fingerprint

Thrombophlebitis
Veins
Education
Heparin
Platelet Count
Critical Illness
Intensive Care Units
Hemorrhage

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Computerized order entry sets and intensive education improve the rate of prophylaxis for deep vein thrombophlebitis. / Levi, Daniela; Kupfter, Y.; Seneviratne, C.; Tessler, S.

In: Chest, Vol. 114, No. 4 SUPPL., 10.1998.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{177dd9d293d2498f956dd295b6d1396d,
title = "Computerized order entry sets and intensive education improve the rate of prophylaxis for deep vein thrombophlebitis",
abstract = "Purpose: Prophylactic measures to prevent deep vein thrombophlebitis (DVT) have been shown to be successful. Recent studies have shown, however, that they are underutilized; only 35-55{\%} of eligible patients actually receive prophylaxis. We prospectively studied the effectiveness of intensive education and the use of computerized order entry sets in improving the use of DVT prophylaxis in critically ill patients. Methods: All patients admitted to the intensive care units between July 1, 1997 and April 30, 1998 were evaluated. Patients requiring full anticoagulation were excluded. Unit A was the control unit; the staff were not intensively educated nor were computerized order sets available. In Unit B, the staff were intensively educated regarding the risks and benefits of DVT prophylaxis and in Unit C, the staff were both educated and required to use standardized computer entry sets which included DVT prophylaxis. Patients who were having acute bleeding or who were severely thrombocytopenic (platelet count < 50,000) were not supposed to receive heparin. Patients were randomly admitted to the three Units. Results: A total of 2,436 patients were admitted during this period; 609 required full anticoagulation and were excluded. 1,827 patients were evaluated; the mean age was 76.4 (±10.5) and was similar for all three Units. 645 patients were admitted to Unit A (control); 245 (38{\%}) were appropriately prophylaxed; 390 (60.5{\%}) did not receive prophylaxis and 10 (1.6{\%}) were inappropriately prophylaxed. In Unit B, 584 patients were admitted; 362 (62{\%}) received appropriate prophylaxis, 213 (36.5{\%}) did not receive prophylaxis and 9 (1.5{\%}) were inappropriately prophylaxed. In Unit C, 598 patients were admitted; 58 (97.2{\%}) were appropriately given prophylaxis, 7 (1.2{\%}) did not receive prophylaxis and 10 (1.7{\%}) were inappropriately prophylaxed. The rate of appropriate prophylaxis was significantly improved by education alone (62{\%} vs 38.1{\%} {P = 0.01) and even more by the use of computerized order sets (97.2{\%} vs 38{\%} {P = 0.0001} and 97.2{\%} vs 62{\%} {P = 0.01}). The rate of inappropriate use of heparin was the same in all three groups. Conclusions: The combination of intensive education plus the mandatory use of computerized order sets results in almost universal DVT prophylaxis. Clinical Implications: The use of computerized order sets may improve therapy in conditions with accepted therapeutic protocols.",
author = "Daniela Levi and Y. Kupfter and C. Seneviratne and S. Tessler",
year = "1998",
month = "10",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "114",
journal = "Chest",
issn = "0012-3692",
publisher = "American College of Chest Physicians",
number = "4 SUPPL.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Computerized order entry sets and intensive education improve the rate of prophylaxis for deep vein thrombophlebitis

AU - Levi, Daniela

AU - Kupfter, Y.

AU - Seneviratne, C.

AU - Tessler, S.

PY - 1998/10

Y1 - 1998/10

N2 - Purpose: Prophylactic measures to prevent deep vein thrombophlebitis (DVT) have been shown to be successful. Recent studies have shown, however, that they are underutilized; only 35-55% of eligible patients actually receive prophylaxis. We prospectively studied the effectiveness of intensive education and the use of computerized order entry sets in improving the use of DVT prophylaxis in critically ill patients. Methods: All patients admitted to the intensive care units between July 1, 1997 and April 30, 1998 were evaluated. Patients requiring full anticoagulation were excluded. Unit A was the control unit; the staff were not intensively educated nor were computerized order sets available. In Unit B, the staff were intensively educated regarding the risks and benefits of DVT prophylaxis and in Unit C, the staff were both educated and required to use standardized computer entry sets which included DVT prophylaxis. Patients who were having acute bleeding or who were severely thrombocytopenic (platelet count < 50,000) were not supposed to receive heparin. Patients were randomly admitted to the three Units. Results: A total of 2,436 patients were admitted during this period; 609 required full anticoagulation and were excluded. 1,827 patients were evaluated; the mean age was 76.4 (±10.5) and was similar for all three Units. 645 patients were admitted to Unit A (control); 245 (38%) were appropriately prophylaxed; 390 (60.5%) did not receive prophylaxis and 10 (1.6%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. In Unit B, 584 patients were admitted; 362 (62%) received appropriate prophylaxis, 213 (36.5%) did not receive prophylaxis and 9 (1.5%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. In Unit C, 598 patients were admitted; 58 (97.2%) were appropriately given prophylaxis, 7 (1.2%) did not receive prophylaxis and 10 (1.7%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. The rate of appropriate prophylaxis was significantly improved by education alone (62% vs 38.1% {P = 0.01) and even more by the use of computerized order sets (97.2% vs 38% {P = 0.0001} and 97.2% vs 62% {P = 0.01}). The rate of inappropriate use of heparin was the same in all three groups. Conclusions: The combination of intensive education plus the mandatory use of computerized order sets results in almost universal DVT prophylaxis. Clinical Implications: The use of computerized order sets may improve therapy in conditions with accepted therapeutic protocols.

AB - Purpose: Prophylactic measures to prevent deep vein thrombophlebitis (DVT) have been shown to be successful. Recent studies have shown, however, that they are underutilized; only 35-55% of eligible patients actually receive prophylaxis. We prospectively studied the effectiveness of intensive education and the use of computerized order entry sets in improving the use of DVT prophylaxis in critically ill patients. Methods: All patients admitted to the intensive care units between July 1, 1997 and April 30, 1998 were evaluated. Patients requiring full anticoagulation were excluded. Unit A was the control unit; the staff were not intensively educated nor were computerized order sets available. In Unit B, the staff were intensively educated regarding the risks and benefits of DVT prophylaxis and in Unit C, the staff were both educated and required to use standardized computer entry sets which included DVT prophylaxis. Patients who were having acute bleeding or who were severely thrombocytopenic (platelet count < 50,000) were not supposed to receive heparin. Patients were randomly admitted to the three Units. Results: A total of 2,436 patients were admitted during this period; 609 required full anticoagulation and were excluded. 1,827 patients were evaluated; the mean age was 76.4 (±10.5) and was similar for all three Units. 645 patients were admitted to Unit A (control); 245 (38%) were appropriately prophylaxed; 390 (60.5%) did not receive prophylaxis and 10 (1.6%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. In Unit B, 584 patients were admitted; 362 (62%) received appropriate prophylaxis, 213 (36.5%) did not receive prophylaxis and 9 (1.5%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. In Unit C, 598 patients were admitted; 58 (97.2%) were appropriately given prophylaxis, 7 (1.2%) did not receive prophylaxis and 10 (1.7%) were inappropriately prophylaxed. The rate of appropriate prophylaxis was significantly improved by education alone (62% vs 38.1% {P = 0.01) and even more by the use of computerized order sets (97.2% vs 38% {P = 0.0001} and 97.2% vs 62% {P = 0.01}). The rate of inappropriate use of heparin was the same in all three groups. Conclusions: The combination of intensive education plus the mandatory use of computerized order sets results in almost universal DVT prophylaxis. Clinical Implications: The use of computerized order sets may improve therapy in conditions with accepted therapeutic protocols.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4243384774&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4243384774&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:4243384774

VL - 114

JO - Chest

JF - Chest

SN - 0012-3692

IS - 4 SUPPL.

ER -