William Geerts, Abdulaziz Aljurayyan, Malin Carling.
Response/Recommendation: In patients with fractures and visceral injuries, anticoagulant-based thromboprophylaxis should be commenced as soon as bleeding risk allows. Bilateral mechanical thromboprophylaxis, if possible, should be administered to patients who are at high bleeding risk.
Strength of Recommendation: Strong.
Rationale: Orthopaedic trauma patients frequently have concomitant visceral and/or brain injuries1–4. In general, major fractures significantly increase the risk of VTE in polytrauma5–10 while non-orthopaedic injuries (except spinal cord injuries) generally have a much lower impact on the risk of VTE associated with fractures11,12. Conversely, bleeding risk in patients with polytrauma is largely dictated by the presence of visceral and brain injuries.
In polytrauma, VTE risk is relatively high13,14, and use of mechanical and/or chemical prophylaxis should be considered15–18. However, there is wide variability in thromboprophylaxis practice among orthopaedic trauma centers at least in part because of the paucity of direct evidence in this specific group19.
Timing of the initiation of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis: In major trauma patients, the transition to a hypercoagulable state usually occurs early and is often seen at the time of admission20–22. Furthermore, numerous studies have shown that early initiation of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis is associated with decreased risk of VTE in mixed trauma groups2,3,12,18,19 and in subgroups, including pelvic trauma20–23, spine fractures24–27, solid abdominal organ injuries28–31, and head injuries8,32,33. At the same time, bleeding complications were not shown to be increased with early anticoagulant prophylaxis in most studies8,12,18–21,23–30. Among 2,752 patients with isolated, severe pelvic fractures, commencement of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis within 48 hours after admission was associated with a 49% decrease in VTE, a 5-fold lower pulmonary embolism (PE) rate, and reduced mortality with no bleeding complications compared with later commencement21. However, patients who received early anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis had less severe injuries. Another study, that included 79,386 trauma patients, showed a significant decrease in VTE if thromboprophylaxis was started within the first 48 hours compared with a later start without an increase in bleeding events19. In this database study, most of the patients had an injury severity score (ISS) of less than 16 and neither distribution of fractures nor surgical management were reported. Rostas et al., found that early anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in patients with blunt liver or spleen injuries was safe and was associated with reduced rates of VTE18. A double-blind randomized trial demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) thromboprophylaxis started within 36 hours of injury in 344 major trauma patients; LMWH was also shown to be significantly more effective and as safe as low-dose heparin34. Another trial showed that, among trauma patients who were randomized to receive enoxaparin within 24 hours of admission or only mechanical thromboprophylaxis, major and minor bleeding did not differ between groups35.
For patients with high risk of bleeding or in whom evidence of hemostasis has not yet occurred, the initial use of sequential compression devices (SCD) is recommended, although the evidence for use of SCD in major trauma is weak10,11,36.
Traumatic brain injury patients: The main barrier to early anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in patients with orthopaedic trauma is the presence of traumatic brain injury (TBI)8,33,37. Although patients with TBI have an increased risk of VTE38,39, anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis is often delayed because of concerns about progression of intracranial bleeding (ICB). One study reported a greater risk of ICB associated with early anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis40, while the vast majority did not8,32,37,41–46. Among 1,803 patients with moderate or severe TBI (head Abbreviated Injury Scale > 2), those who started anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis within 48 hours after injury were three times less likely to develop VTE than those who started later without increased bleeding risk8. Three systematic reviews have each shown that VTE was significantly decreased with early anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in TBI without an increased risk of ICB progression42,47,48. A possible limitation of most of the studies on this topic is that patients with the most severe head injuries may have been excluded or had delayed anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. However, a large Trauma Quality Improvement Project (TQIP) study in 2,468 severe TBI patients used propensity-matching of those who had early (< 72 hours) or later (> 72 hours) anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis32. The early group had a lower risk of PE (odds ratio [OR], 0.48) and DVT (OR, 0.51) without an increase in either mortality or neurosurgical intervention. In the only randomized trial addressing this issue, enoxaparin started within 24 hours after injury in 681 TBI patients with stable head computer tomography (CT) was not associated with an increased risk of hemorrhagic progression compared with placebo49. Finally, a systematic review of 21 studies found no relationship between the timing of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis initiation and hemorrhagic progression in patients with TBI44.
The Neurocritical Care Society recommends that TBI patients commence anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis within 24 – 48 hours of presentation50. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) 2021 guidelines on VTE prophylaxis in TBI also recommend initiation of thromboprophylaxis as soon as possible, generally within 24 – 72 hours after admission13. We agree with early initiation of LMWH thromboprophylaxis in most TBI patients with the provision that a repeat head CT after the admission scan should demonstrate stability of intracranial bleeding. The presence of an intracranial pressure measurement device is not a contraindication to anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis51.
Patients with solid organ injury: The majority of solid organ injuries (liver, spleen, kidney, and pancreas) are now treated nonoperatively52. Anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis started within 48 hours after blunt solid organ injury in addition to SCD was associated with significantly fewer DVT than a later start (0 vs. 9%, p=0.024) with no patient requiring an intervention for bleeding29. The American College of Surgeons TQIP database was accessed to identify 36,187 patients with nonoperative solid organ injuries over a two-year period30. Patients who received thromboprophylaxis within 48 hours had significantly fewer DVT and PE than those who started later with no increase in bleeding complications or transfusion. These findings were confirmed in a subgroup analysis comparing a start of thromboprophylaxis within 24 hours compared to within 48 hours. Among 3,223 patients with isolated abdominal solid organ injuries, late initiation of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis was an independent predictor of VTE (OR 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9 – 5.2) while abbreviated injury scale (AIS) scores of 3 – 5 for liver or spleen injuries were associated with increased bleeding rates regardless of timing of thromboprophylaxis31. The 2021 AAST guidelines recommend that LMWH start within 48 hours after solid organ injury if there is evidence that active bleeding has stopped13. This is based on multiple studies showing no increase in bleeding with early initiation of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in patients with solid organ injuries18,29,30,53.
Conclusion: In polytrauma, the bleeding risk is highest immediately and in the early period after injury. Clearly, the initial clinical priority in such patients is to control active bleeding. The risk of VTE also begins early after injury although clinically important thrombosis is usually delayed. Both VTE and bleeding risks are modified by the combination of fractures and non-orthopaedic visceral injuries. Orthopaedic trauma patients are at relatively high risk of VTE while the risk of bleeding is generally dictated by the concomitant visceral and head injuries. In general, delayed thromboprophylaxis is associated with increased VTE rates. At the same time, early initiation of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis does not appear to be associated with increased bleeding risk in patients with visceral and head injuries when there is evidence that there is no active bleeding.
- We recommend that every polytrauma patient be evaluated on admission for both bleeding and thrombosis risks12.
- Patients with active bleeding are usually managed surgically or by endovascular embolization. We recommend that anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis be delayed until the high bleeding risk resolves.
- Once there is evidence that there is no active bleeding, we recommend anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis, generally with weight-based LMWH and generally within 24 hours after injury12. For TBI, when consecutive brain imaging is stable for ICB (usually 24 – 36 hours after injury), we recommend starting anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis.
- For patients at high risk for bleeding, we recommend starting SCD, although the high frequency of lower extremity fractures in polytrauma often precludes use of bilateral SCD. Once hemostasis occurs, we recommend replacing SCD with LMWH or adding LMWH to SCD.
- We recommend early fixation of unstable fractures to reduce pain, promote mobility and decrease VTE risk22. If fracture repair will be delayed, we recommend that LMWH thromboprophylaxis not be delayed.
- Since missed anticoagulant doses are associated with increased VTE risk, this should be avoided unless it is essential8,53,54.
- Early mobility and daily physiotherapy should also be encouraged55,56; for example, increased risk of DVT was seen after spinal injuries in which spinal precautions persisted beyond 72 hours compared with a shorter time in spite of routine use of SCD in both groups57.
- The duration of thromboprophylaxis in polytrauma is uncertain and is generally more influenced by orthopaedic and spinal cord injuries than by visceral injuries. We recommend that thromboprophylaxis generally be limited to the length of hospital stay.
- For patients undergoing in-patient rehabilitation, we recommend continuation of thromboprophylaxis with either a direct oral anticoagulant such as rivaroxaban (generally our preference) or with LMWH. However, we recommend against post-discharge primary thromboprophylaxis unless there are additional major risk factors (such as previous VTE or active cancer); this approach has not been carefully studied and, therefore, is at the clinical judgement of the care team58. Further studies are underway59.
- We recommend the use of standardized VTE prophylaxis policies, embedded in routine order sets, as well as periodic audits of adherence to reduce unnecessary variability in practice and improve patient outcomes including VTE12,13,60,61.
1. Knudson MM, Ikossi DG, Khaw L, Morabito D, Speetzen LS. Thromboembolism after trauma: an analysis of 1602 episodes from the American College of Surgeons National Trauma Data Bank. Ann Surg. 2004;240(3):490-496; discussion 496-498. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000137138.40116.6c
2. Nathens AB, McMurray MK, Cuschieri J, et al. The practice of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in the major trauma patient. J Trauma. 2007;62(3):557-562; discussion 562-563. doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e318031b5f5
3. Byrne JP, Geerts W, Mason SA, et al. Effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin to prevent pulmonary embolism following major trauma: A propensity-matched analysis. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017;82(2):252-262. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000001321
4. Karcutskie CA, Meizoso JP, Ray JJ, et al. Association of Mechanism of Injury With Risk for Venous Thromboembolism After Trauma. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(1):35-40. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.3116
5. Geerts WH, Code KI, Jay RM, Chen E, Szalai JP. A prospective study of venous thromboembolism after major trauma. N Engl J Med. 1994;331(24):1601-1606. doi:10.1056/NEJM199412153312401
6. Rogers FB, Shackford SR, Horst MA, et al. Determining venous thromboembolic risk assessment for patients with trauma: the Trauma Embolic Scoring System. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73(2):511-515. doi:10.1097/ta.0b013e3182588b54
7. Domes CM, Schleyer AM, McQueen JM, Pergamit RF, Beingessner DM. Evaluation of Appropriate Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Patients With Orthopaedic Trauma With Symptom-Driven Vascular and Radiographic Studies. J Orthop Trauma. 2017;31(12):611-616. doi:10.1097/BOT.0000000000000991
8. Coleman JR, Carmichael H, Zangara T, et al. A Stitch in Time Saves Clots: Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis in Traumatic Brain Injury. J Surg Res. 2021;258:289-298. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2020.08.076
9. Valle EJ, Van Haren RM, Allen CJ, et al. Does traumatic brain injury increase the risk for venous thromboembolism in polytrauma patients? J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;77(2):243-250. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000000307
10. Barrera LM, Perel P, Ker K, Cirocchi R, Farinella E, Morales Uribe CH. Thromboprophylaxis for trauma patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(3):CD008303. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008303.pub2
11. Rogers FB, Cipolle MD, Velmahos G, Rozycki G, Luchette FA. Practice management guidelines for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in trauma patients: the EAST practice management guidelines work group. J Trauma. 2002;53(1):142-164. doi:10.1097/00005373-200207000-00032
12. Ley EJ, Brown CVR, Moore EE, et al. Updated guidelines to reduce venous thromboembolism in trauma patients: A Western Trauma Association critical decisions algorithm. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020;89(5):971-981. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000002830
13. Rappold JF, Sheppard FR, Carmichael Ii SP, et al. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in the trauma intensive care unit: an American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Critical Care Committee Clinical Consensus Document. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2021;6(1):e000643. doi:10.1136/tsaco-2020-000643
14. Sagi HC, Ahn J, Ciesla D, et al. Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Orthopaedic Trauma Patients: A Survey of OTA Member Practice Patterns and OTA Expert Panel Recommendations. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29(10):e355-362. doi:10.1097/BOT.0000000000000387
15. Selby R, Geerts W, Ofosu FA, et al. Hypercoagulability after trauma: hemostatic changes and relationship to venous thromboembolism. Thromb Res. 2009;124(3):281-287. doi:10.1016/j.thromres.2008.10.002
16. Brill JB, Badiee J, Zander AL, et al. The rate of deep vein thrombosis doubles in trauma patients with hypercoagulable thromboelastography. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017;83(3):413-419. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000001618
17. Sumislawski JJ, Kornblith LZ, Conroy AS, Callcut RA, Cohen MJ. Dynamic coagulability after injury: Is delaying venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis worth the wait? J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018;85(5):907-914. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000002048
18. Rostas JW, Manley J, Gonzalez RP, et al. The safety of low molecular-weight heparin after blunt liver and spleen injuries. Am J Surg. 2015;210(1):31-34. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.08.023
19. Hecht JP, Han EJ, Cain-Nielsen AH, Scott JW, Hemmila MR, Wahl WL. Association of timing of initiation of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with outcomes in trauma patients. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2021;90(1):54-63. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000002912
20. Jehan F, O’Keeffe T, Khan M, et al. Early thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin is safe in patients with pelvic fracture managed nonoperatively. J Surg Res. 2017;219:360-365. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2017.06.049
21. Benjamin E, Aiolfi A, Recinos G, Inaba K, Demetriades D. Timing of venous thromboprophylaxis in isolated severe pelvic fracture: Effect on mortality and outcomes. Injury. 2019;50(3):697-702. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2019.02.009
22. Wu L, Cheng B. Analysis of perioperative risk factors for deep vein thrombosis in patients with femoral and pelvic fractures. J Orthop Surg. 2020;15(1):597. doi:10.1186/s13018-020-02131-5
23. Schellenberg M, Benjamin E, Inaba K, et al. When Is It Safe to Start Pharmacologic Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Pelvic Fractures? A Prospective Study From a Level I Trauma Center. J Surg Res. 2021;258:272-277. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2020.08.077
24. Kim DY, Kobayashi L, Chang D, Fortlage D, Coimbra R. Early pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is safe after operative fixation of traumatic spine fractures. Spine. 2015;40(5):299-304. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000754
25. Khan M, Jehan F, O’Keeffe T, et al. Optimal Timing of Initiation of Thromboprophylaxis after Nonoperative Blunt Spinal Trauma: A Propensity-Matched Analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2018;226(5):760-768. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.01.006
26. Zeeshan M, Khan M, O’Keeffe T, et al. Optimal timing of initiation of thromboprophylaxis in spine trauma managed operatively: A nationwide propensity-matched analysis of trauma quality improvement program. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018;85(2):387-392. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000001916
27. Hamidi M, Asmar S, Bible L, et al. Early Thromboprophylaxis in Operative Spinal Trauma Does Not Increase Risk of Bleeding Complications. J Surg Res. 2021;258:119-124. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2020.08.029
28. Joseph B, Pandit V, Harrison C, et al. Early thromboembolic prophylaxis in patients with blunt solid abdominal organ injuries undergoing nonoperative management: is it safe? Am J Surg. 2015;209(1):194-198. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.03.007
29. Schellenberg M, Inaba K, Biswas S, et al. When is It Safe to Start VTE Prophylaxis After Blunt Solid Organ Injury? A Prospective Study from a Level I Trauma Center. World J Surg. 2019;43(11):2797-2803. doi:10.1007/s00268-019-05096-7
30. Skarupa D, Hanna K, Zeeshan M, et al. Is early chemical thromboprophylaxis in patients with solid organ injury a solid decision? J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2019;87(5):1104-1112. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000002438
31. Gaitanidis A, Breen KA, Nederpelt C, et al. Timing of thromboprophylaxis in patients with blunt abdominal solid organ injuries undergoing nonoperative management. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2021;90(1):148-156. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000002972
32. Byrne JP, Mason SA, Gomez D, et al. Timing of Pharmacologic Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;223(4):621-631.e5. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.06.382
33. Brandi G, Schmidlin A, Klinzing S, Schüpbach R, Unseld S, Pagnamenta A. Delayed prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin increases the risk of venous thromboembolic events in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: a retrospective analysis. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2020;52(1):28-33. doi:10.5114/ait.2020.93395
34. Geerts WH, Jay RM, Code KI, et al. A comparison of low-dose heparin with low-molecular-weight heparin as prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism after major trauma. N Engl J Med. 1996;335(10):701-707. doi:10.1056/NEJM199609053351003
35. Ginzburg E, Cohn SM, Lopez J, et al. Randomized clinical trial of intermittent pneumatic compression and low molecular weight heparin in trauma. Br J Surg. 2003;90(11):1338-1344. doi:10.1002/bjs.4309
36. Arabi YM, Al-Hameed F, Burns KEA, et al. Adjunctive Intermittent Pneumatic Compression for Venous Thromboprophylaxis. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(14):1305-1315. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1816150
37. Hachem LD, Mansouri A, Scales DC, Geerts W, Pirouzmand F. Anticoagulant prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism following severe traumatic brain injury: A prospective observational study and systematic review of the literature. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2018;175:68-73. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2018.09.032
38. Denson K, Morgan D, Cunningham R, et al. Incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with traumatic brain injury. Am J Surg. 2007;193(3):380-383; discussion 383-384. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.12.004
39. Skrifvars MB, Bailey M, Presneill J, et al. Venous thromboembolic events in critically ill traumatic brain injury patients. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43(3):419-428. doi:10.1007/s00134-016-4655-2
40. Levy AS, Salottolo K, Bar-Or R, et al. Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis is a risk factor for hemorrhage progression in a subset of patients with traumatic brain injury. J Trauma. 2010;68(4):886-894. doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e3181d27dd5
41. Norwood SH, Berne JD, Rowe SA, Villarreal DH, Ledlie JT. Early venous thromboembolism prophylaxis with enoxaparin in patients with blunt traumatic brain injury. J Trauma. 2008;65(5):1021-1026; discussion 1026-1027. doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e31818a0e74
42. Mesa Galan LA, Egea-Guerrero JJ, Quintana Diaz M, Vilches-Arenas A. The effectiveness and safety of pharmacological prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016;81(3):567-574. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000001134
43. Frisoli FA, Shinseki M, Nwabuobi L, et al. Early Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis After Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage. Neurosurgery. 2017;81(6):1016-1020. doi:10.1093/neuros/nyx164
44. Margolick J, Dandurand C, Duncan K, et al. A Systematic Review of the Risks and Benefits of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Traumatic Brain Injury. Can J Neurol Sci J Can Sci Neurol. 2018;45(4):432-444. doi:10.1017/cjn.2017.275
45. Störmann P, Osinloye W, Freiman TM, Seifert V, Marzi I, Lustenberger T. Early Chemical Thromboprophylaxis Does not Increase the Risk of Intracranial Hematoma Progression in Patients with Isolated Severe Traumatic Brain Injury. World J Surg. 2019;43(11):2804-2811. doi:10.1007/s00268-019-05072-1
46. Rivas L, Vella M, Ju T, et al. Early Chemoprophylaxis Against Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury. Am Surg. Published online January 27, 2021:3134820983171. doi:10.1177/0003134820983171
47. Lu VM, Alvi MA, Rovin RA, Kasper EM. Clinical outcomes following early versus late pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in patients with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurg Rev. 2020;43(3):861-872. doi:10.1007/s10143-018-1045-y
48. Spano PJ, Shaikh S, Boneva D, Hai S, McKenney M, Elkbuli A. Anticoagulant chemoprophylaxis in patients with traumatic brain injuries: A systematic review. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020;88(3):454-460. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000002580
49. Phelan HA, Wolf SE, Norwood SH, et al. A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled pilot trial of anticoagulation in low-risk traumatic brain injury: The Delayed Versus Early Enoxaparin Prophylaxis I (DEEP I) study. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73(6):1434-1441. doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e31825ac49e
50. Nyquist P, Bautista C, Jichici D, et al. Prophylaxis of Venous Thrombosis in Neurocritical Care Patients: An Evidence-Based Guideline: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society. Neurocrit Care. 2016;24(1):47-60. doi:10.1007/s12028-015-0221-y
51. Dengler BA, Mendez-Gomez P, Chavez A, et al. Safety of Chemical DVT Prophylaxis in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury with Invasive Monitoring Devices. Neurocrit Care. 2016;25(2):215-223. doi:10.1007/s12028-016-0280-8
52. Cimbanassi S, Chiara O, Leppaniemi A, et al. Nonoperative management of abdominal solid-organ injuries following blunt trauma in adults: Results from an International Consensus Conference. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018;84(3):517-531. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000001774
53. Louis SG, Sato M, Geraci T, et al. Correlation of missed doses of enoxaparin with increased incidence of deep vein thrombosis in trauma and general surgery patients. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(4):365-370. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3963
54. Salottolo K, Offner P, Levy AS, Mains CW, Slone DS, Bar-Or D. Interrupted pharmocologic thromboprophylaxis increases venous thromboembolism in traumatic brain injury. J Trauma. 2011;70(1):19-24; discussion 25-26. doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e318207c54d
55. Booth K, Rivet J, Flici R, et al. Progressive Mobility Protocol Reduces Venous Thromboembolism Rate in Trauma Intensive Care Patients: A Quality Improvement Project. J Trauma Nurs Off J Soc Trauma Nurses. 2016;23(5):284-289. doi:10.1097/JTN.0000000000000234
56. Regner JL, Shaver CN, SWSC Multicenter Trials Group. Determining the impact of culture on venous thromboembolism prevention in trauma patients: A Southwestern Surgical Congress Multicenter trial. Am J Surg. 2019;217(6):1030-1036. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.11.005
57. MacCallum KP, Kalata S, Darcy D, et al. Prolonged use of spinal precautions is associated with increased morbidity in the trauma patient. Injury. 2020;51(2):317-321. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2019.12.022
58. Haac BE, Van Besien R, O’Hara NN, et al. Post-discharge adherence with venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after orthopedic trauma: Results from a randomized controlled trial of aspirin versus low molecular weight heparin. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018;84(4):564-574. doi:10.1097/TA.0000000000001771
59. O’Toole RV, Stein DM, Frey KP, et al. PREVENTion of CLots in Orthopaedic Trauma (PREVENT CLOT): a randomised pragmatic trial protocol comparing aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin for blood clot prevention in orthopaedic trauma patients. BMJ Open. 2021;11(3):e041845. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041845
60. Haut ER, Lau BD, Kraenzlin FS, et al. Improved prophylaxis and decreased rates of preventable harm with the use of a mandatory computerized clinical decision support tool for prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in trauma. Arch Surg Chic Ill 1960. 2012;147(10):901-907. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2012.2024
61. Machado-Aranda DA, Jakubus JL, Wahl WL, et al. Reduction in Venous Thromboembolism Events: Trauma Performance Improvement and Loop Closure Through Participation in a State-Wide Quality Collaborative. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221(3):661-668. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.05.006