This work was produced by Horner et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. This is an Open Access publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. For attribution the title, original author(s), the publication source – NIHR Journals Library, and the DOI of the publication must be cited.
NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Abstract
Background:
Pharmacological prophylaxis during hospital admission can reduce the risk of acquired blood clots (venous thromboembolism) but may cause complications, such as bleeding. Using a risk assessment model to predict the risk of blood clots could facilitate selection of patients for prophylaxis and optimise the balance of benefits, risks and costs.
Objectives:
We aimed to identify validated risk assessment models and estimate their prognostic accuracy, evaluate the cost-effectiveness of different strategies for selecting hospitalised patients for prophylaxis, assess the feasibility of using efficient research methods and estimate key parameters for future research.
Design:
We undertook a systematic review, decision-analytic modelling and observational cohort study conducted in accordance with Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines.
Setting:
NHS hospitals, with primary data collection at four sites.
Participants:
Medical and surgical hospital inpatients, excluding paediatric, critical care and pregnancy-related admissions.
Interventions:
Prophylaxis for all patients, none and according to selected risk assessment models.
Main outcome measures:
Model accuracy for predicting blood clots, lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years associated with alternative strategies, accuracy of efficient methods for identifying key outcomes and proportion of inpatients recommended prophylaxis using different models.
Results:
We identified 24 validated risk assessment models, but low-quality heterogeneous data suggested weak accuracy for prediction of blood clots and generally high risk of bias in all studies. Decision-analytic modelling showed that pharmacological prophylaxis for all eligible is generally more cost-effective than model-based strategies for both medical and surgical inpatients, when valuing a quality-adjusted life-year at £20,000. The findings were more sensitive to uncertainties in the surgical population; strategies using risk assessment models were more cost-effective if the model was assumed to have a very high sensitivity, or the long-term risks of post-thrombotic complications were lower.
Efficient methods using routine data did not accurately identify blood clots or bleeding events and several pre-specified feasibility criteria were not met. Theoretical prophylaxis rates across an inpatient cohort based on existing risk assessment models ranged from 13% to 91%.
Limitations:
Existing studies may underestimate the accuracy of risk assessment models, leading to underestimation of their cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness findings do not apply to patients with an increased risk of bleeding. Mechanical thromboprophylaxis options were excluded from the modelling. Primary data collection was predominately retrospective, risking case ascertainment bias.
Conclusions:
Thromboprophylaxis for all patients appears to be generally more cost-effective than using a risk assessment model, in hospitalised patients at low risk of bleeding. To be cost-effective, any risk assessment model would need to be highly sensitive. Current evidence on risk assessment models is at high risk of bias and our findings should be interpreted in this context. We were unable to demonstrate the feasibility of using efficient methods to accurately detect relevant outcomes for future research.
Future work:
Further research should evaluate routine prophylaxis strategies for all eligible hospitalised patients. Models that could accurately identify individuals at very low risk of blood clots (who could discontinue prophylaxis) warrant further evaluation.
Study registration:
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165778 and Researchregistry5216.
Funding:
This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127454) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 20. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Plain language summary
People who are admitted to hospital are at risk of blood clots that can cause serious illness or death. Patients are often given low doses of blood-thinning drugs to reduce this risk. However, these drugs can cause side effects, such as bleeding.
Hospitals currently use complex risk assessment models (risk scores, which usually include patient, disease, mobility and intervention factors) to determine the individual risk of blood clots and identify people most likely to benefit from blood-thinning drugs. There are a lot of different risk scores and we do not know which one is best. We also do not know how these scores compare to each other or whether using scores to decide who should get blood-thinning drugs provides good value for money to the NHS.
We reviewed all previous studies of risk scores. We found that they did not predict blood clots very well and we could not recommend one score over another. We then created a mathematical model to simulate the use of blood-thinning drugs in people admitted to hospital. The model suggested that giving blood-thinning drugs to everyone who could have them would probably provide the best value for money, in medical patients. Our findings were the same, but less certain, for surgical patients.
We also collected information from four NHS hospitals to explore possibilities for future research. Our work showed that routinely collected electronic data on blood clots and bleeding events is not very accurate and that using different scores could result in variable use of blood-thinning medications.
Our findings suggest that it may be better value to the NHS and better for patients if we were to offer blood-thinning medications to everyone on admission to hospital, without using any risk score. However, this approach needs further research to ensure it is safe and effective. Such research would not be able to rely on routine electronic data to identify blood clots or bleeding events, in isolation.
Contents
- Scientific summary
- Chapter 1. Introduction
- Chapter 2. Rationale and objectives
- Chapter 3. Workstream 1 – systematic review
- Chapter 4. Workstream 1 – economic evaluation
- Chapter 5. Workstream 2 – assessing the feasibility of efficient data methods for use in future implementation research
- Chapter 6. Workstream 2 – estimating key parameters for future implementation research
- Chapter 7. Workstream 2 – national survey of leads regarding current practice and willingness to participate in future implementation research
- Chapter 8. Discussion
- Chapter 9. Conclusions
- Acknowledgements
- References
- Appendix 1. Literature search strategy and additional materials for the systematic review of RAMs for in hospital inpatients
- Appendix 2. Supplementary material from the economic evaluation
- Appendix 3. Additional data from the multicentre observational cohort study
- Appendix 4. Additional data from the national survey of leads
- Glossary
- List of abbreviations
- List of supplementary material
About the Series
Full disclosure of interests: Completed ICMJE forms for all authors, including all related interests, are available in the toolkit on the NIHR Journals Library report publication page at https://doi
Primary conflicts of interest: Steve Goodacre was Deputy Programme Director of the NIHR Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme and chair of the NIHR HTA commissioning committee up to 31/12/2020, which included membership of the HTA Remit and Competitiveness Group, HTA Post-Funding Committee teleconference, HTA Funding Committee Policy Group and HTA Prioritisation Group. Daniel Hind is a current member of the NIHR HTA Clinical Evaluation and Trials Committee, and NIHR HTA Fast Track Committee. Mark Holland has received honorariums from Pfizer for conference presentations. Kerstin de Wit has received an unrestricted grant from Bayer. Dan Horner has previously acted as a paid subject matter expert on venous thromboembolic disease for the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch. Beverley Hunt, Dan Horner and Xavier Griffin were previously involved in developing relevant National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on prevention and management of venous thromboembolic disease.
Article history
The research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HTA programme as award number NIHR127454. The contractual start date was in July 2019. The draft report began editorial review in January 2022 and was accepted for publication in September 2022. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HTA editors and publisher have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors’ manuscript and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the draft document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this manuscript.
Last reviewed: January 2022; Accepted: September 2022.
- NLM CatalogRelated NLM Catalog Entries
- Review Thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy and the puerperium: a systematic review and economic evaluation to estimate the value of future research.[Health Technol Assess. 2024]Review Thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy and the puerperium: a systematic review and economic evaluation to estimate the value of future research.Davis S, Pandor A, Sampson FC, Hamilton J, Nelson-Piercy C, Hunt BJ, Daru J, Goodacre S, Carser R, Rooney G, et al. Health Technol Assess. 2024 Mar; 28(9):1-176.
- Different strategies for pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for lower-limb immobilisation after injury: systematic review and economic evaluation.[Health Technol Assess. 2019]Different strategies for pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for lower-limb immobilisation after injury: systematic review and economic evaluation.Pandor A, Horner D, Davis S, Goodacre S, Stevens JW, Clowes M, Hunt BJ, Nokes T, Keenan J, de Wit K. Health Technol Assess. 2019 Dec; 23(63):1-190.
- Compression stockings in addition to low-molecular-weight heparin to prevent venous thromboembolism in surgical inpatients requiring pharmacoprophylaxis: the GAPS non-inferiority RCT.[Health Technol Assess. 2020]Compression stockings in addition to low-molecular-weight heparin to prevent venous thromboembolism in surgical inpatients requiring pharmacoprophylaxis: the GAPS non-inferiority RCT.Shalhoub J, Lawton R, Hudson J, Baker C, Bradbury A, Dhillon K, Everington T, Gohel MS, Hamady Z, Hunt BJ, et al. Health Technol Assess. 2020 Dec; 24(69):1-80.
- Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.[Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022]Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1; 2(2022). Epub 2022 Feb 1.
- Review A cloud-based medical device for predicting cardiac risk in suspected coronary artery disease: a rapid review and conceptual economic model.[Health Technol Assess. 2024]Review A cloud-based medical device for predicting cardiac risk in suspected coronary artery disease: a rapid review and conceptual economic model.Westwood M, Armstrong N, Krijkamp E, Perry M, Noake C, Tsiachristas A, Corro-Ramos I. Health Technol Assess. 2024 Jul; 28(31):1-105.
- Evaluation of venous thromboembolism risk assessment models for hospital inpatie...Evaluation of venous thromboembolism risk assessment models for hospital inpatients: the VTEAM evidence synthesis
- Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospital...Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospitalised adults: a multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of a calcium channel blocker (nifedipine) and an alpha-blocker (tamsulosin) (the SUSPEND trial)
- Interventions based on early intensive applied behaviour analysis for autistic c...Interventions based on early intensive applied behaviour analysis for autistic children: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis
- Defining the optimum strategy for identifying adults and children with coeliac d...Defining the optimum strategy for identifying adults and children with coeliac disease: systematic review and economic modelling
- The Clots in Legs Or sTockings after Stroke (CLOTS) 3 trial: a randomised contro...The Clots in Legs Or sTockings after Stroke (CLOTS) 3 trial: a randomised controlled trial to determine whether or not intermittent pneumatic compression reduces the risk of post-stroke deep vein thrombosis and to estimate its cost-effectiveness
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...