Search

Objective: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis remains underused in hospitalized medical patients despite strong recommendations that at-risk patients should receive prophylaxis. To understand this gap between knowledge and practice, we surveyed clinicians' perceptions about the importance of DVT prophylaxis, barriers to guideline implementation, and interventions to optimize prophylaxis., Methods: Paper- and electronic mail-based surveys were sent to 1553 internists, nurses, pharmacists, and physiotherapists in Ontario, Canada. Responses were scored on 7-point Likert scales. An important barrier to optimal DVT prophylaxis was 1 with a mean score ≥5, and interventions with high potential success or feasibility were those with mean scores ≥5., Results: DVT prophylaxis was perceived as important by all clinician groups but this did not appear to translate into knowledge about underutilization of current DVT prophylaxis strategies. Physicians and pharmacists recognized the underuse of DVT prophylaxis in medical patients, while nurses and physiotherapists tended to perceive prophylaxis strategies as appropriate. Lack of clear indications and contraindications for prophylaxis and concerns about bleeding risks were perceived as important barriers. Preprinted orders were considered the most potentially successful and feasible way to optimize prophylaxis., Conclusions: A considerable barrier to optimal DVT prophylaxis utilization may be that those healthcare providers best able to conduct a daily assessment of patients' need for prophylaxis underrecognize the problem that prophylaxis is underutilized in this population. Interventions to bridge the gap between knowledge and practice should consider preprinted orders outlining DVT risk factors, and educating front-line care providers prior to implementation of a top-down approach., (Copyright © 2011 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

Purpose: Recent observations in patients with atrial fibrillation who are receiving warfarin suggest that concomitant treatment with a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor (statin) decreases the risk for bleeding., Methods: We conducted a population-based, nested case-control study using the linked administrative databases of Ontario, Canada, to assess whether statin use decreases the risk of bleeding in warfarin users. Eligible patients were Ontario residents, age 66 years or more, with atrial fibrillation who were prescribed warfarin between April 1, 1994, and December 31, 2001. Patients were followed until hospitalization for upper gastrointestinal or intracranial bleeding, study end (March 31, 2002), discontinuation of warfarin, or death. Cases were matched to controls by age and sex. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between bleeding and statin use., Results: We identified 79,207 warfarin users with atrial fibrillation. There were 1518 cases with an upper gastrointestinal or intracranial bleed and 15,100 matched controls without bleeding. Long-term (>/=1 year) statin use was associated with a lower risk for any bleeding (OR=0.80; 95% CI, 0.66-0.97). However, there was no association between bleeding and recent (<6 months) statin use (OR=1.04; 95% CI, 0.74-1.48) or statin use of any duration (OR: 0.91; 95% CI, 0.77-1.07), suggesting potential confounding of the association between statin use and bleeding by a health-user effect., Conclusion: Long-term statin use may be associated with a decreased risk for bleeding in warfarin users with atrial fibrillation. Additional research is needed to further explore this putative association.

Background: The issue of therapeutic equivalence has been a source of controversy in Canada since the approval of generic warfarin products in 2000., Objectives: We surveyed Ontario patients and physicians on perceptions of generic warfarin and brand substitution., Methods: Self-administered questionnaires employed 7.0-point Likert scales of agreement. Patient participants were drawn from a thromboembolism clinic in Hamilton, Ontario. Physician participants were from a random sample of 375 Ontario family physicians, internists, cardiologists and hematologists., Results: Eighty-one patients responded: 52% female, mean age 63.4 years and 63% brand-name warfarin users. Overall, 33% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they would feel comfortable taking generic warfarin. However, seventeen percent agreed or strongly agreed that generic warfarin was neither as safe nor as effective as brand-name warfarin, with this view more common amongst patients taking brand-name than those taking generic warfarin. One hundred and ten (29.3%) physicians returned the survey--29% females, mean age 45.3 years, 22% family physicians. Forty-four percent agreed or strongly agreed that they would rather prescribe brand-name than generic warfarin for patients starting warfarin therapy, while 40.7% agreed or strongly agreed that they would not feel comfortable switching from brand-name to generic warfarin. However, only 19.4% of physicians who had switched patients from brand-name to generic warfarin actually reported difficulties in managing the switch., Conclusion: While most patients and physicians appear to have accepted the principle of therapeutic equivalence of generic and brand-name warfarin, a sizable minority has concerns that could influence prescribing and compliance.

Background: Patients who are receiving warfarin therapy require frequent blood testing to monitor the intensity of anticoagulation. Although previous studies suggest that capillary blood monitoring of the international normalize ratio (INR) is rapid and reliable, patient preferences for the method of blood drawing have not been investigated., Methods: We performed a randomized controlled trial of patients attending an anticoagulation clinic in which patients were randomly allocated to undergo capillary or venous INR monitoring. Patient satisfaction with the outpatient visit, pain associated with blood drawing, and time spent in the clinic were assessed for each patient., Results: Sixty patients were studied. Using a 10-point visual analogue scale to quantify patient satisfaction (0-very satisfied; 10-very dissatisfied), patients expressed a strong preference for capillary INR monitoring over venous INR monitoring (1.64 vs. 4.45; P < 0.001). Using a 10-point visual analogue scale to quantify pain with blood sampling (0-no pain; 10-very painful), patients who underwent capillary INR testing had less pain than venous INR testing (0.83 vs. 2.23; P < or = 0.004). Patients spent, on average, 33 fewer minutes in the clinic with capillary INR testing than venous INR testing (P < 0.001)., Discussion: Our findings support the routine use of capillary blood testing, using a portable monitor, for the management of patients in outpatient anticoagulation clinics.

Study Objectives: (1) To determine physician preferences in the management of warfarin-induced excessive anticoagulation (AC); and (2) to assess compliance with the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines for the reversal of excessive AC., Design: Cross-sectional physician survey., Participants: Members of the Canadian Society of Internal Medicine practicing in Ontario, Canada., Measurements and Results: Physicians were asked to provide management preferences in six clinical scenarios describing warfarin-induced excessive AC. The scenarios represent various combinations of international normalized ratio (INR) value, treatment setting, and presence and severity of bleeding. In scenarios with INRs < 5.2 without bleeding, conservative approaches complying with the ACCP guidelines, such as withholding warfarin or reducing its dose, were most common. In scenarios with high INRs (ie, > 7.1) and/or bleeding, the selection of vitamin K in any form ranged between 71% and 82%. However, compliance with the ACCP-recommended doses and the routes of vitamin K administration ranged from 1 to 10%. In five of the six scenarios, subcutaneous injection, a route not recommended by the ACCP, was the most common method of vitamin K delivery., Conclusions: Physician preferences for the reversal of warfarin-induced excessive AC were highly variable and, in most cases, did not follow the recommendations of the ACCP consensus guidelines. Furthermore, the widespread reported use of subcutaneous vitamin K is concerning because this route of vitamin K administration has been demonstrated to be less effective than IV administration of vitamin K. These findings highlight the need for randomized controlled trials to compare the efficacy of different routes of administration of vitamin K for warfarin-associated coagulopathy.