Low absolute risk of thrombotic and cardiovascular events in outpatient pregnant women with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy may contribute to an excess risk of thrombotic or cardiovascular events. COVID-19 increases the risk of these events, although the risk is relatively limited among outpatients. We sought to determine whether outpatient pregnant women with COVID-19 are at a high risk for cardiovascular or thrombotic events. MATERIALS & METHODS: We analyzed pregnant outpatients with COVID-19 from the multicenter CORONA-VTE-Network registry. The main study outcomes were a composite of adjudicated venous or arterial thrombotic events, and a composite of adjudicated cardiovascular events. Events were assessed 90 days after the COVID-19 diagnosis and reported for non-pregnant women ≤45 years, and for men ≤45 years, as points of reference. RESULTS: Among 6585 outpatients, 169 were pregnant at diagnosis. By 90-day follow-up, two pregnant women during the third trimester had lower extremity venous thrombosis, one deep and one superficial vein thrombosis. The cumulative incidence of thrombotic events was 1.20 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.0 to 2.84 %). Respective rates were 0.47 % (95 % CI: 0.14 % to 0.79 %) among non-pregnant women, and 0.49 % (95 % CI: 0.06 % to 0.91 %) among men ≤45 years. No non-thrombotic cardiovascular events occurred in pregnant women. The rates of cardiovascular events were 0.53 % (95 % CI: 0.18 to 0.87) among non-pregnant women, and 0.68 % (95 % CI: 0.18 to 1.18) in men aged ≤45 years. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombotic and cardiovascular events are rare among outpatients with COVID-19. Although a higher event rate among outpatient pregnant women cannot be excluded, the absolute event rates are low and do not warrant population-wide cardiovascular interventions to optimize outcomes.

Dying at home: enablers and barriers.

BACKGROUND: According to the Grattan institute in 2014, 70% of Australians indicated a preference to die at home, however, only 14% of all deaths were at home. AIMS: To identify how patients can be supported to die at home if that is their preference. METHODS: A retrospective medical record audit of eligible Community Palliative Care (CPC) patients who indicated a wish to die at home was undertaken. FINDINGS: Out of a total of 114 patients, 74% indicated a preference to die at home. Of these, 66% achieved a home death, and most lived with a carer. Enablers for home death included family support, regular nursing visits and equipment. People who attended an emergency department in their last month of life, lived alone or were undergoing oncological treatment were more likely to die elsewhere. CONCLUSION: A range of enablers and barriers to home death were found, with many of the enablers being factors that prevented hospital presentations.

Anticoagulation-Associated Adverse Drug Events in Hospitalized Patients Across Two Time Periods.

PURPOSE: Anticoagulants often cause adverse drug events (ADEs), comprised of medication errors and adverse drug reactions, in patients. Our study objective was to determine the clinical characteristics, types, severity, cause, and outcomes of anticoagulation-associated ADEs from 2015-2020 (a contemporary period following implementation of an electronic health record, infusion device technology, and anticoagulant dosing nomograms) and to compare them with those of a historical period (2004-2009). METHODS: We reviewed all anticoagulant-associated ADEs reported as part of our hospital-wide safety system. Reviewers classified type, severity, root cause, and outcomes for each ADE according to standard definitions. Reviewers also assessed events for patient harm. Patients were followed up to 30 days after the event. RESULTS: Despite implementation of enhanced patient safety technology and procedure, ADEs increased in the contemporary period. In the contemporary period, we found 925 patients who had 984 anticoagulation-associated ADEs, including 811 isolated medication errors (82.4%); 13 isolated adverse drug reactions (1.4%); and 160 combined medication errors, adverse drug reactions, or both (16.2%). Unfractionated heparin was the most frequent ADE-related anticoagulant (77.7%, contemporary period vs 58.3%, historical period). The most frequent anticoagulation-associated medication error in the contemporary period was wrong rate or frequency of administration (26.1%, n = 253), with the most frequent root cause being prescribing errors (21.3%, n = 207). The type, root cause, and harm from ADEs were similar between periods. CONCLUSIONS: We found that anticoagulation-associated ADEs occurred despite advances in patient safety technologies and practices. Events were common, suggesting marginal improvements in anticoagulant safety over time and ample opportunities for improvement.

Extended-Duration Low-Intensity Apixaban to Prevent Recurrence in Patients with Provoked Venous Thromboembolism and Enduring Risk Factors: Rationale and Design of the HI-PRO Trial.

Patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the setting of transient provoking factors are typically treated with short-term anticoagulation. However, the risk of recurrence may be increased in the presence of enduring risk factors. In such patients, the optimal duration of treatment remains uncertain. HI-PRO is a single-center, double-blind randomized trial. Patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) following a major provoking factor, including major surgery or major trauma, who completed at least 3 months of standard-dose therapeutic anticoagulation and have at least one enduring risk factor (such as obesity or heart failure) will be considered for inclusion. Patients will be randomized to apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily or placebo for 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome will be symptomatic recurrent VTE-a composite of DVT and/or PE at 12 months after randomization. Secondary efficacy outcomes include a composite of death due to cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke or systemic embolism, major adverse limb events, or coronary or peripheral ischemia requiring revascularization at 12 months, and individual components of these outcomes. The primary safety outcome is major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis definition. The study plans to enroll 600 patients (300 per arm) to have 80% power for detecting a 75% relative risk reduction in the primary outcome. Active recruitment began in March 2021. HI-PRO will provide clinically meaningful data on whether patients with provoked VTE and enduring risk factors have fewer adverse clinical outcomes if prescribed low-intensity extended-duration anticoagulation.

Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on In-Hospital Mortality and Stroke in Acute Aortic Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Acute aortic syndromes may present with a number of cardiovascular complications, including atrial fibrillation. We assessed the prevalence of atrial fibrillation in patients presenting with acute aortic syndromes and evaluated atrial fibrillation's association with in-hospital mortality and stroke. METHODS: Consecutive patients with acute aortic syndromes admitted to a single tertiary care center from January 2015 to March 2020 were included. We identified patients with atrial fibrillation on the presenting electrocardiogram. RESULTS: A total of 309 patients with acute aortic syndromes were included in our analyses: 148 (48%) presented with Stanford type A and 161 (52%) with Stanford type B acute aortic syndromes. Twenty-seven (8.7%) patients had atrial fibrillation on the presenting electrocardiogram: 12 (44%) with type A and 15 (56%) with type B acute aortic syndromes. Patients with atrial fibrillation were older, more likely to be white, had a higher frequency of history of cancer, peripheral artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, compared with those without atrial fibrillation. Acute aortic syndromes patients with atrial fibrillation had higher frequencies of in-hospital mortality compared with those without atrial fibrillation (40.7% vs 12.4%, P < .0001). However, stroke frequencies did not differ between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: In patients presenting with acute aortic syndromes and atrial fibrillation, we observed higher frequencies of in-hospital mortality, without differences in the frequencies of stroke.

Registry of Arterial and Venous Thromboembolic Complications in Patients With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular complications, including myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and pulmonary embolism, represent an important source of adverse outcomes in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVES: To assess the frequency of arterial and venous thromboembolic disease, risk factors, prevention and management patterns, and outcomes in patients with COVID-19, the authors designed a multicenter, observational cohort study. METHODS: We analyzed a retrospective cohort of 1,114 patients with COVID-19 diagnosed through our Mass General Brigham integrated health network. The total cohort was analyzed by site of care: intensive care (n = 170); hospitalized nonintensive care (n = 229); and outpatient (n = 715). The primary study outcome was a composite of adjudicated major arterial or venous thromboembolism. RESULTS: Patients with COVID-19 were 22.3% Hispanic/Latinx and 44.2% non-White. Cardiovascular risk factors of hypertension (35.8%), hyperlipidemia (28.6%), and diabetes (18.0%) were common. Prophylactic anticoagulation was prescribed in 89.4% of patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care cohort and 84.7% of those in the hospitalized nonintensive care setting. Frequencies of major arterial or venous thromboembolism, major cardiovascular adverse events, and symptomatic venous thromboembolism were highest in the intensive care cohort (35.3%, 45.9%, and 27.0 %, respectively) followed by the hospitalized nonintensive care cohort (2.6%, 6.1%, and 2.2%, respectively) and the outpatient cohort (0% for all). CONCLUSIONS: Major arterial or venous thromboembolism, major adverse cardiovascular events, and symptomatic venous thromboembolism occurred with high frequency in patients with COVID-19, especially in the intensive care setting, despite a high utilization rate of thromboprophylaxis.

Patient education program for venous thromboembolism prevention in hospitalized patients.

PURPOSE: Up to 15% of clinician-ordered doses of injectable pharmacological prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism are not administered. Patient refusal accounts for nearly 50% of these omitted doses. We conducted a prospective cohort study to determine whether a patient education program would improve medication adherence to clinician-ordered injectable prophylactic anticoagulation. METHODS: We identified 528 hospitalized patients ordered to receive injectable pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. We evaluated the impact of pharmacist-led patient education sessions on medication adherence (defined as the ratio of doses administered to doses scheduled) compared with our historical cohort. RESULTS: Individualized patient education sessions were conducted within 24 hours of the initial order for prophylactic anticoagulation in 99% of patients. Adherence to clinician-ordered pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis was higher after the patient education program than in our historical cohort (94.4% vs 89.9%, P <.0001). The proportion of patients receiving 100% of scheduled doses of injectable pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis was higher after our novel patient education program than in our historical cohort (73.7% vs 62.4%, P=.001). Patient refusal as a reason for omitted doses was less frequent after the patient education program (29.3% vs 43.7%, P=.001). CONCLUSION: Pharmacist-led individualized patient education sessions were associated with higher medication adherence to clinician-ordered injectable pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and a reduction in patient refusal as a reason for omitted doses. A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of a patient education program on medication adherence to pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is warranted.

Venous thromboembolism: scope of the problem and the nurse's role in risk assessment and prevention.

Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, comprising different manifestations of the same clinical entity referred to as venous thromboembolism, are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Despite pulmonary embolism being considered the most preventable cause of in-hospital death, the use of appropriate thromboprophylaxis remains suboptimal in many patients. Nurses are on the frontline of thrombosis prevention. By playing an essential role in diagnosis and risk assessment, applying timely preventive methods, and providing vital educational and psychologic support for patients with venous thromboembolism, skilled nursing intervention can save lives.

Gender differences in the administration of prophylaxis to prevent deep venous thrombosis.

We investigated gender differences in the prescription of prophylaxis against deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in 2,619 patients who developed acute DVT while being hospitalized for reasons other than DVT or were diagnosed with acute DVT as outpatients but who had been hospitalized within 30 days prior to DVT diagnosis. Men were 21% more likely than women to receive prophylaxis (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.03-1.43; p=0.021) after adjusting for DVT risk factors, including surgery, trauma, prior DVT, age, and cancer.

Venous thromboembolism: prevention & treatment.

Venous thromboembolism still threatens the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in the United States--and some of them are your patients. Here's how to put the latest research and technology to good use in the fight against thromboembolic disease.