Tromboseprofylaxe in de algemene chirurgische praktijk anno 2004: rond ingrepen tijdens opname, tijdens dagbehandeling en na gipsimmobilisatie

OBJECTIVE: To determine which thromboprophylactic modalities were used by general surgeons in the Netherlands; to check current clinical practice against national and international guidelines.

DESIGN: Descriptive.

METHOD: In April 2004 a questionnaire was sent to all 106 surgical practices in the Netherlands with questions regarding the use of thromboprophylaxis before, during and after various surgical interventions. Practice was compared with guidelines from the Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement CBO, the Dutch Surgical Association and the American College of Chest Physicians.

RESULTS: We obtained data from 92 (87%) surgical practices. Low molecular weight heparin was initiated before surgery by 92% of respondents. Risk factors such as age (72%) and prior venous thromboembolism (76%) played an important role in determining the thromboprophylactic protocol used. During hospitalisation, variations were seen primarily for operations performed on an out-patient basis: 61% of surgeons gave thromboprophylaxis in this setting. Prolonged thromboprophylaxis after hospital discharge was seldom administered. 54% of surgeons used prolonged thromboprophylaxis after surgery for hip or femur fractures. During cast immobilisation of the upper leg, 79% of all surgeons prescribed thromboprophylaxis.

CONCLUSION: Current practice regarding thromboprophylaxis during hospitalisation conformed consistently to the guidelines. The guidelines were followed moderately with regard to the use of prolonged thromboprophylaxis following hip fractures. In the absence of clear guidelines, there were striking differences among surgical practices regarding thromboprophylaxis during out-patient care and plaster cast immobilisation.