The Collateral Benefit of COVID Pandemic: Improved Pharmacological Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Practices in Non-COVID Patients

Abstract

Background

COVID-19 creates a hypercoagulable state with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations. Of those, venous thromboembolism (VTE) is prevalent, and numerous studies have highlighted the importance of VTE prophylaxis. Pre-pandemic VTE prophylaxis practices have already been poor, despite guidelines. We hypothesized that the gap between guidelines and practices might have been closed due to increased awareness.

Materials and Methods

Non-COVID-19 patients hospitalized in the internal medicine ward of a university hospital between January 1st, 2021, and June 30th, 2021, were assessed. VTE risk and thromboprophylaxis requirements were assessed using the Padua Prediction Score (PPS). The results were compared with the findings of the study conducted in the same setting before the pandemic.

Results

A total of 267 patients were included, and 81 patients (30.3%) received prophylaxis. A total of 128 patients’ (47.9%) PPS was ≥ 4, and 69 patients (53.9%) received prophylaxis; 12 low-risk patients (8.6%) received prophylaxis although it was not indicated. Compared to the pre-pandemic figures, both appropriate prophylaxis use and overuse rates have risen. While the increment rate of appropriate prophylaxis was statistically significant, the increment rate of overuse did not reach statistical significance. Patients hospitalized for infectious diseases and respiratory failure were more likely to receive appropriate prophylaxis.

Conclusion

We have demonstrated a significant increase in appropriate pharmacologic prophylaxis rates among high-risk patients. Besides all the collateral damage the pandemic has created, it might also have brought collateral benefits with regards to VTE prophylaxis.

Keywords:

• COVID-19
• venous thromboembolism
• risk assessment
• quality of health care
• quality improvement

Ethics Approval

The study was approved by the Hacettepe University Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Date: 29 June 2021, Decision No: GO 21/864).

Author Contributions

All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.