RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To analyze measures referred to venous thromboembolic prophylaxis in critically ill patients. DESIGN: An epidemiological, cross-sectional (prevalence cut), multicenter study was performed using an electronic survey. Comparison of results with quality indexes of the Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine, the American College of Chest Physician guidelines and international studies. SETTING: Intensive Care Units (ICUs) in the Community of Madrid (Spain). PATIENTS: All patients admitted to the ICU on the day of the survey. VARIABLES OF INTEREST: General aspects of venous thromboembolic prophylaxis and protocols used (risk stratification and ultrasound screening). A descriptive analysis was performed, continuous data being expressed as the mean or median, and categorical data as percentages. RESULTS: A total of 234 patients in 18 ICUs were included. Eighteen percent (42/234) received no prophylaxis, and 55% had no contraindication to pharmacological prophylaxis. Of the 192 patients receiving prophylaxis, 84% received pharmacological prophylaxis, 14% mechanical prophylaxis and 2% combined prophylaxis. Low molecular weight heparin was the only pharmacological prophylaxis used, with a majority use of enoxaparin (17 of 18 ICUs). In patients with mechanical prophylaxis (31/192), antiembolic stockings were the most commonly used option (58%). Pharmacological prophylaxis contraindications were reported in 20% of the patients (46/234), the most frequent cause being thrombocytopenia (28% of the cases). Fifty percent of the ICUs used no specific venous thromboembolic prophylaxis protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacological prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin was the most frequently used venous thromboembolic prophylactic measure. In patients with contraindications to pharmacological prophylaxis, mechanical measures were little used. The use of combined prophylaxis was anecdotal. Many of our ICUs lack specific prophylaxis protocols.