External validation of the simplified Geneva risk assessment model for hospital-associated venous thromboembolism in the Padua cohort.

decision support techniques hospitalization pulmonary embolism risk assessment venous thrombosis

Journal

Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH
ISSN: 1538-7836
Titre abrégé: J Thromb Haemost
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101170508

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
03 2020
Historique:
received: 06 09 2019
accepted: 21 11 2019
pubmed: 30 11 2019
medline: 15 5 2021
entrez: 30 11 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The simplified Geneva risk assessment model (RAM) predicts the risk of hospitalization-related venous thromboembolism (VTE) in medical inpatients in its developmental cohort but has not been validated. To externally validate the simplified Geneva RAM. For this secondary analysis of a prospective cohort set in Padua, we calculated the simplified Geneva RAM for all participants. They were followed up for 90 days for the occurrence of adjudicated VTE. Thirty- and 90-day risks of VTE were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and categories of risks compared with a Cox regression model adjusted for the use of thromboprophylaxis. Among 1180 medical inpatients, the 90-day risk of symptomatic VTE was 3.1%. The simplified Geneva RAM classified 56.9% as high risk (≥3 points; 90-day risk of VTE of 5.2%) and 43.1% as low risk (<3 points; 90-day risk of VTE of 0.4%). Compared with low-risk participants, high-risk participants had an 18-fold greater risk of VTE than low-risk participants (hazard ratio [HR] 17.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.3-74.7). A very high-risk category (≥7 points) identified 5.3% of participants with a 9.5% probability of VTE at 90 days. In this external validation study, we confirm the excellent discrimination and clinically adequate calibration of the simplified Geneva RAM as a stratification tool to guide the use of thromboprophylaxis.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The simplified Geneva risk assessment model (RAM) predicts the risk of hospitalization-related venous thromboembolism (VTE) in medical inpatients in its developmental cohort but has not been validated.
OBJECTIVES
To externally validate the simplified Geneva RAM.
PATIENTS/METHODS
For this secondary analysis of a prospective cohort set in Padua, we calculated the simplified Geneva RAM for all participants. They were followed up for 90 days for the occurrence of adjudicated VTE. Thirty- and 90-day risks of VTE were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and categories of risks compared with a Cox regression model adjusted for the use of thromboprophylaxis.
RESULTS
Among 1180 medical inpatients, the 90-day risk of symptomatic VTE was 3.1%. The simplified Geneva RAM classified 56.9% as high risk (≥3 points; 90-day risk of VTE of 5.2%) and 43.1% as low risk (<3 points; 90-day risk of VTE of 0.4%). Compared with low-risk participants, high-risk participants had an 18-fold greater risk of VTE than low-risk participants (hazard ratio [HR] 17.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.3-74.7). A very high-risk category (≥7 points) identified 5.3% of participants with a 9.5% probability of VTE at 90 days.
CONCLUSIONS
In this external validation study, we confirm the excellent discrimination and clinically adequate calibration of the simplified Geneva RAM as a stratification tool to guide the use of thromboprophylaxis.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31782886
doi: 10.1111/jth.14688
pii: S1538-7836(22)03794-1
doi:

Substances chimiques

Anticoagulants 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

676-680

Informations de copyright

© 2019 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Références

Blondon M, Limacher A, Righini M, Aujesky DA, Méan M. Adequacy of Hospital Thromboprophylaxis and Risk Assessment Models in the SWITCO65+ Cohort. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2019;3:760.
Cobben MRR, Nemeth B, Lijfering WM, Cannegieter SC. Validation of risk assessment models for venous thrombosis in hospitalized medical patients. Res Pract Thromb Haemost John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2019;3:217-225.
Blondon M, Spirk D, Kucher N, et al. Comparative performance of clinical risk assessment models for hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism in medical patients. Thromb Haemost Schattauer GmbH. 2018;118:82-89.
Barbar S, Noventa F, Rossetto V, et al. A risk assessment model for the identification of hospitalized medical patients at risk for venous thromboembolism: the Padua Prediction Score. J Thromb Haemost. 2010;8:2450-2457.
Spyropoulos AC, Anderson FA, Fitzgerald G, et al. Predictive and associative models to identify hospitalized medical patients at risk for VTE. Chest. 2011;140:706-714.
Nendaz M, Spirk D, Kucher N, et al. Multicentre validation of the Geneva Risk Score for hospitalised medical patients at risk of venous thromboembolism. Explicit ASsessment of Thromboembolic RIsk and Prophylaxis for Medical PATients in SwitzErland (ESTIMATE). Thromb Haemost Schattauer Publishers. 2014;111:531-538.
Stuck AK, Spirk D, Schaudt J, Kucher N. Risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. A systematic review. Thromb Haemost Schattauer Publishers. 2017;117:801-808.
Spirk D, Stuck AK, Hager A, Engelberger RP, Aujesky D, Kucher N. Electronic alert system for improving appropriate thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Thromb Haemost. 2017;15:2138-2146.
Nendaz MR, Chopard P, Lovis C, et al. Adequacy of venous thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients (IMPART): multisite comparison of different clinical decision support systems. J Thromb Haemost John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (10.1111); 2010;8:1230-1234.
Barbar S, Prandoni P. Scoring systems for estimating risk of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized medical patients. Semin Thromb Hemost Thieme Medical Publishers 2017;43:460-468.
Woller SC, Stevens SM, Evans RS, et al. Electronic alerts, comparative practitioner metrics, and education improve thromboprophylaxis and reduce venous thrombosis in community hospitals. Res Pract Thromb Haemost Wiley-Blackwell. 2018;2:481-489.
Ay C, Posch F, Kaider A, Zielinski C, Pabinger I. Estimating risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer in the presence of competing mortality. J Thromb Haemost John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (10.1111); 2015;13:390-397.

Auteurs

Marc Blondon (M)

Division of Angiology and Hemostasis, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.

Marc Righini (M)

Division of Angiology and Hemostasis, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.

Mathieu Nendaz (M)

Unit of Development and Research in Medical Education (UDREM), Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, and Division of General Internal Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Frédéric Glauser (F)

Division of Angiology and Hemostasis, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.

Helia Robert-Ebadi (H)

Division of Angiology and Hemostasis, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.

Paolo Prandoni (P)

Arianna Foundation on Anticoagulation, Bologna, Italy.

Sofia Barbar (S)

Division of General Internal Medicine, Padua and Department of Medicine, University of Padua, Italy.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH