Peggy S. Kraus

Lessons from the Johns Hopkins Multi-Disciplinary Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Prevention Collaborative

Problem Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of potentially preventable mortality, morbidity, and increased medical costs. Risk-appropriate prophylaxis can prevent most VTE events, but only a small fraction of patients at risk receive this treatment. Design Prospective quality improvement programme. Setting Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Strategies for change A multidisciplinary team established a VTE Prevention Collaborative in 2005. The collaborative applied the four step TRIP (translating research into practice) model to develop and implement a mandatory clinical decision support tool for VTE risk stratification and risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis for all hospitalised adult patients. Initially, paper based VTE order sets were implemented, which were then converted into 16 specialty-specific, mandatory, computerised, clinical decision support modules. Key measures for improvement VTE risk stratification within 24 hours of hospital admission and provision of risk-appropriate, evidence based VTE prophylaxis. Effects of change The VTE team was able to increase VTE risk assessment and ordering of risk-appropriate prophylaxis with paper based order sets to a limited extent, but achieved higher compliance with a computerised clinical decision support tool and the data feedback which it enabled. Risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis increased from 26% to 80% for surgical patients and from 25% to 92% for medical patients in 2011. Lessons learnt A computerised clinical decision support tool can increase VTE risk stratification and risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis among hospitalised adult patients admitted to a large urban academic medical centre. It is important to ensure the tool is part of the clinician’s normal workflow, is mandatory (computerised forcing function), and offers the requisite modules needed for every clinical specialty.

Improved Prophylaxis and Decreased Rates of Preventable Harm With the Use of a Mandatory Computerized Clinical Decision Support Tool for Prophylaxis for Venous Thromboembolism in Trauma

OBJECTIVE Venous thromboembolism is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality and is largely preventable. Despite this fact, appropriate prophylaxis is vastly underutilized. To improve compliance with best practice prophylaxis for VTE in hospitalized trauma patients, we implemented a mandatory computerized provider order entry-based clinical decision support tool. The system required completion of checklists of VTE risk factors and contraindications to pharmacologic prophylaxis. With this tool, we were able to determine a patients risk stratification level and recommend appropriate prophylaxis. To evaluate the effect of our mandatory computerized provider order entry-based clinical decision support tool on compliance with prophylaxis guidelines for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and VTE outcomes among admitted adult trauma patients. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study (from January 2007 through December 2010). SETTING University-based, state-designated level 1 adult trauma center. PATIENTS A total of 1599 hospitalized adult trauma patients with a hospital length of stay greater than 1 day. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients who were ordered risk-appropriate guideline-suggested VTE prophylaxis. The secondary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with any preventable VTE (defined as VTE in a patient not ordered guideline-appropriate VTE prophylaxis), pulmonary embolism, and/or deep vein thrombosis. RESULTS Compliance with guideline-appropriate prophylaxis increased from 66.2% to 84.4% (P < .001). The rate of preventable harm from VTE decreased from 1.0% to 0.17% (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS Implementation of a mandatory computerized provider order entry-based clinical decision support tool significantly improved compliance with VTE prophylaxis guidelines in hospitalized adult trauma patients. This improved compliance was associated with a significant decrease in the rate of preventable harm, which was defined as VTE events in patients not ordered appropriate prophylaxis.

Impact of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis “smart order set”: Improved compliance, fewer events

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) affects over 700,000 Americans annually. Prophylaxis reduces the risk of VTE by 60% but many patients still do not receive risk‐appropriate VTE prophylaxis. To improve our institutions VTE prophylaxis performance, we developed mandatory computerized clinical decision support‐enabled “smart order sets” that required providers to assess VTE risk factors and contraindications to pharmacologic prophylaxis. Using provider responses, the order set recommends evidence‐based risk‐appropriate VTE prophylaxis. To study the impact of our “smart order set” on prescription of risk‐appropriate VTE prophylaxis and clinical outcomes, we conducted a retrospective chart review of consecutive patients admitted to the Medicine service during one month immediately prior to (November 2007) and a single month subsequent to (April 2010) order set launch. Data collection included patient demographics, VTE risk factors, and the use and type of VTE prophylaxis. The pre‐ and post‐implementation cohorts contained 1,000 and 942 patients, respectively. After implementation of the “smart order set”, the prescription of risk‐appropriate VTE prophylaxis increased from 65.6% to 90.1% (P < 0.0001). Orders for any form of VTE prophylaxis increased from 76.4% to 95.6% (P < 0.0001). Radiographically documented symptomatic VTE within 90 days of hospital discharge declined from 2.5% to 0.7% (P = 0.002). Preventable harm was completely eliminated (1.1% to 0%, P = 0.001) with no difference in major bleeding or all‐cause mortality. A VTE prophylaxis computerized clinical decision support‐enabled “smart order set” improved prescription of risk‐appropriate VTE prophylaxis, reduced symptomatic VTE and eliminated preventable harm from VTE without increasing major bleeding. Am. J. Hematol. 88:545–549, 2013.

Patterns of Non-Administration of Ordered Doses of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis: Implications for Novel Intervention Strategies

Background Recent studies have documented high rates of non-administration of ordered venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis doses. Intervention strategies that target all patients have been effective, but prohibitively resource-intensive. We aimed to identify efficient intervention strategies based on patterns of non-administration of ordered VTE prophylaxis. Methods and Findings In this retrospective review of electronic medication administration records, we included adult hospitalized patients who were ordered pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin over a seven-month period. The primary measure was the proportion of ordered doses of VTE prophylaxis not administered, assessed at the patient, floor, and floor type levels. Differences in non-administration rates between groups were assessed using generalized estimating equations. A total of 103,160 ordered VTE prophylaxis doses during 10,516 patient visits on twenty-nine patient floors were analyzed. Overall, 11.9% of ordered doses were not administered. Approximately 19% of patients missed at least one quarter and 8% of patients missed over one half of ordered doses. There was marked heterogeneity in non-administration rate at the floor level (range: 5–27%). Patients on medicine floors missed a significantly larger proportion (18%) of ordered doses compared to patients on other floor types (8%, Odds Ratio: 2.4, p<0.0001). However, more than half of patients received at least 86% of their ordered doses, even on the lowest performing floor. The 20% of patients who missed at least two ordered doses accounted for 80% of all missed doses. Conclusions A substantial proportion of ordered doses of VTE prophylaxis were not administered. The heterogeneity in non-administration rate between patients, floors, and floor types can be used to target interventions. The small proportion of patients that missed multiple ordered doses accounted for a large majority of non-administered doses. This recognition of the Pareto principle provides opportunity to efficiently target a relatively small group of patients for intervention.

Preventability of Hospital-Acquired Venous Thromboembolism

patients with complicated appendicitis, 173 (42.3%) were identified as having a serum sodium level of less than 135 mEq/L (to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 1.0). Longer hospital lengths of stay, deep surgical site infections, and return visits to the emergency department were more prevalent among patients with complicated appendicitis. Exploratory logistic regression analysis identified significant cut points and 4 independent predictors for complicated appendicitis, of which hyponatremia was found to have the strongest association with this outcome (Table 2). The C statistic or area under the curve of the model was 0.71. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistic was P = .90.

Individualized Performance Feedback to Surgical Residents Improves Appropriate Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Prescription and Reduces Potentially Preventable VTE: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Objective: To investigate the effect of providing personal clinical effectiveness performance feedback to general surgery residents regarding prescription of appropriate venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Background: Residents are frequently charged with prescribing medications for patients, including VTE prophylaxis, but rarely receive individual performance feedback regarding these practice habits. Methods: This prospective cohort study at the Johns Hopkins Hospital compared outcomes across 3 study periods: (1) baseline, (2) scorecard alone, and (3) scorecard plus coaching. All general surgery residents (n = 49) and surgical patients (n = 2420) for whom residents wrote admission orders during the first 9 months of the 2013–2014 academic year were included. Outcomes included the proportions of patients prescribed appropriate VTE prophylaxis, patients with preventable VTE, and residents prescribing appropriate VTE prophylaxis for every patient, and results from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education resident survey. Results: At baseline, 89.4% of patients were prescribed appropriate VTE prophylaxis and only 45% of residents prescribed appropriate prophylaxis for every patient. During the scorecard period, appropriate VTE prophylaxis prescription significantly increased to 95.4% (P < 0.001). For the scorecard plus coaching period, significantly more residents prescribed appropriate prophylaxis for every patient (78% vs 45%, P = 0.0017). Preventable VTE was eliminated in both intervention periods (0% vs 0.35%, P = 0.046). After providing feedback, significantly more residents reported receiving data about practice habits on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education resident survey (87% vs 38%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Providing personal clinical effectiveness feedback including data and peer-to-peer coaching improves resident performance, and results in a significant reduction in harm for patients.

Eliminating Health Care Disparities With Mandatory Clinical Decision Support: The Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Example.

Background:All hospitalized patients should be assessed for venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk factors and prescribed appropriate prophylaxis. To improve best-practice VTE prophylaxis prescription for all hospitalized patients, we implemented a mandatory computerized clinical decision support (CCDS) tool. The tool requires completion of checklists to evaluate VTE risk factors and contraindications to pharmacological prophylaxis, and then recommends the risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis regimen. Objectives:The objective of the study was to examine the effect of a quality improvement intervention on race-based and sex-based health care disparities across 2 distinct clinical services. Research Design:This was a retrospective cohort study of a quality improvement intervention. Subjects:The study included 1942 hospitalized medical patients and 1599 hospitalized adult trauma patients. Measures:In this study, the proportion of patients prescribed risk-appropriate, best-practice VTE prophylaxis was evaluated. Results:Racial disparities existed in prescription of best-practice VTE prophylaxis in the preimplementation period between black and white patients on both the trauma (70.1% vs. 56.6%, P=0.025) and medicine (69.5% vs. 61.7%, P=0.015) services. After implementation of the CCDS tool, compliance improved for all patients, and disparities in best-practice prophylaxis prescription between black and white patients were eliminated on both services: trauma (84.5% vs. 85.5%, P=0.99) and medicine (91.8% vs. 88.0%, P=0.082). Similar findings were noted for sex disparities in the trauma cohort. Conclusions:Despite the fact that risk-appropriate prophylaxis should be prescribed equally to all hospitalized patients regardless of race and sex, practice varied widely before our quality improvement intervention. Our CCDS tool eliminated racial disparities in VTE prophylaxis prescription across 2 distinct clinical services. Health information technology approaches to care standardization are effective to eliminate health care disparities.

Patient Preferences for Receiving Education on Venous Thromboembolism Prevention – A Survey of Stakeholder Organizations

Importance Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among hospitalized patients and is largely preventable. Strategies to decrease the burden of VTE have focused on improving clinicians’ prescribing of prophylaxis with relatively less emphasis on patient education. Objective To develop a patient-centered approach to education of patients and their families on VTE: including importance, risk factors, and benefit/harm of VTE prophylaxis in hospital settings. Design, Setting and Participants The objective of this study was to develop a patient-centered approach to education of patients and their families on VTE: including importance, risk factors, and benefit/harm of VTE prophylaxis in hospital settings. We implemented a three-phase, web-based survey (SurveyMonkey) between March 2014 and September 2014 and analyzed survey data using descriptive statistics. Four hundred twenty one members of several national stakeholder organizations and a single local patient and family advisory board were invited to participate via email. We assessed participants’ preferences for VTE education topics and methods of delivery. Participants wanted to learn about VTE symptoms, risk factors, prevention, and complications in a context that emphasized harm. Although participants were willing to learn using a variety of methods, most preferred to receive education in the context of a doctor-patient encounter. The next most common preferences were for video and paper educational materials. Conclusions Patients want to learn about the harm associated with VTE through a variety of methods. Efforts to improve VTE prophylaxis and decrease preventable harm from VTE should target the entire continuum of care and a variety of stakeholders including patients and their families.

Hidden Barriers to Delivery of Pharmacological Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis: The Role of Nursing Beliefs and Practices.

Background Standardized electronic order sets for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis have increased the proportion of patients receiving venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. However, ordering venous thromboembolism prophylaxis does not ensure consistent administration. Objective To explore causes of variability in the rate of administration of ordered doses of pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis among hospital units. Design Mixed methods study, including qualitative observation and quantitative nursing survey administration. Subjects Nurses included in observations were practicing on an inpatient unit, caring for patients with orders to receive venous thromboembolism prophylaxis consisting of low-dose unfractionated heparin or low–molecular weight heparin. Nurses on 12 inpatient units with disparate rates of administration were included in the survey. Measures Qualitative observation data were collected until thematic saturation was achieved. Survey was conducted to identify beliefs and practices surrounding nursing administration of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Results During observations, some nurses presented pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis to their patients as an optional therapy. Nurses on low-performing units are more likely to believe that pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is ordered for patients who do not require it. More often, they also acknowledge that nurses use their clinical decision-making skills to determine when to omit unnecessary doses of prescribed venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Conclusions Nurses on units with low administration rates often believe they have the skills to determine which patients require pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. They are also more likely to believe that ordered doses are discretionary and offer the medication as optional to patients.

Patient preferences regarding pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis

BACKGROUND The 2012 American College of Chest Physicians venous thromboembolism prevention guidelines emphasized the importance of considering patient preferences when ordering venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. OBJECTIVE Determine patient preferences regarding pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. DESIGN Single-center, mixed-methods survey. SETTING Academic medical center. PATIENTS Consecutive hospitalized patients on surgical and medical units. MEASUREMENTS Patients were asked about their preferences regarding the route of administration for pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and the rationale for their preference. Qualitative analyses of themes were determined from patient rationale. RESULTS Of the 227 patients, a majority (60.4%) preferred an oral medication, if equally effective to subcutaneous options. Dislike of needles (30.0%) and pain from injection (27.7%) were identified as rationales for their preference. Patients favoring subcutaneous administration (27.5%) identified a presumed faster onset of action (40.3%) as the primary reason for their preference. Patients with a preference for subcutaneous injections were less likely to refuse prophylaxis than patients who preferred an oral route of administration (37.5% vs 51.3%, P < 0.0001). LIMITATION Only medical and surgical patients participated. CONCLUSION In a sample of consecutive medical and surgical patients, a majority preferred an oral route of administration for prophylaxis. Patients preferring subcutaneous injections were less likely to refuse doses of ordered pharmacologic prophylaxis. These results indicate use of an oral agent for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis may improve adherence and that integrating patient preferences into care may increase delivery of effective prophylaxis and reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism.