Abstract:Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major contributor to hospital mortality and disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) loss. Multiple guidelines recommend using the Padua or IMPROVE scores to stratify VTE risk in hospitalized medical patients. However, the IMPROVE score is not recommended in Chinese guidelines, and there is very little evaluation of its clinical application and effectiveness in the Chinese population. The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of the Padua and IMPROVE scoring models for assessing VTE risk in Chinese medical inpatients. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the clinical characteristics and thrombotic risk of 42,257 medical inpatients at a tertiary hospital in Guangdong, China, between 2021 and 2022. Logistic regression was used to assess thrombotic risk factors. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves, Area Under the Curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were employed to evaluate the performance of the two models. Of the 42,257 patients included, 948 (2.24%) experienced VTE during hospitalization. According to the Padua score, 3,7513 (88.78%) of patients were considered low risk, while 4,744 (18.22%) were classified as high risk. The IMPROVE score identified 20,744 (49.09%) of patients as low risk, 20799(49.22%) as intermediate risk, and 714(1.69%) as high risk. The AUC for the Padua score was 0.735 (95% CI: 0.717–0.753), with a sensitivity of 49.4% and specificity of 89.6%. For the IMPROVE score, the AUC was 0.711 (95% CI: 0.693–0.729), with a sensitivity of 32.5% and specificity of 99.0%. The DeLong test, used to compare the AUCs, yielded a z-value of 1.886 with a P-value of 0.059, indicating no statistical difference. When assessing VTE risk in patients with stroke, cancer, nephrotic syndrome, and critical illness (ICU/CCU stay), both scoring models showed comparable predictive performance with AUCs ranging between 0.7 and 0.8. Both the Padua score and IMPROVE score have good predictive ability for VTE events during hospitalization in medical patients. Among them, the IMPROVE score has objective assessment items, simpler operation, and more detailed risk stratification, which is beneficial for clinicians to take physical and pharmacological preventive measures at different levels.

External validation and update of the International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism bleeding risk score for predicting bleeding in acutely ill hospitalized medical patients: a retrospective single-center cohort study in Japan

Development and internal validation of the Cleveland Clinic Bleeding Model to predict major bleeding risk at admission in medical inpatients

Assessing the Risk for Development of Deep Vein Thrombosis among Chinese Patients Using the 2010 Caprini Risk Assessment Model: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

External Validation of the Risk Assessment Model of Venous Thromboembolism in Multicenter Internal Medicine Inpatients

Validation of the IMPROVE Bleeding Risk Score in Chinese Medical Patients During Hospitalization: Findings from the Dissolve-2 Study

In medical inpatients, the IMPROVE risk score had moderate predictive power for 14-d in-hospital bleeding

A Novel Risk Assessment Model Predicts Major Bleeding Risk at Admission in Medical Inpatients

Venous thromboembolism risk factors and usefulness of a risk scoring system in lower limb orthopedic surgery: A case-control study in Japan

Validation of the IMPROVE bleeding risk assessment model in surgical patients: Results from the DissolVE-2 Study

Characterization of Venous Thromboembolism Risk in Medical Inpatients Using Different Clinical Risk Assessment Models

Efficacy of Caprini risk assessment model in predicting venous thromboembolism risks among Asian surgical patients

External Validation of the ICU-Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment Model in Adult Critically Ill Patients

Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk Criteria associated with 2-year bleeding events and mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement discharge: a Japanese Multicentre Prospective OCEAN-TAVI Registry Study

Converting IMPROVE bleeding and VTE risk-assessment models into a fast-and-frugal decision tree for optimal VTE prophylaxis

Internal Validation of a Risk Scoring System for Venous Thromboembolism After Total hip or Knee Arthroplasty

Prediction of the need for emergency endoscopic treatment for upper gastrointestinal bleeding and new score model: a retrospective study

Comparison of the PADUA and IMPROVE scores in assessing venous thromboembolism risk in 42,257 medical inpatients in China

Predictors for the prescription of pharmacological prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism during hospitalization in Internal Medicine: a sub-analysis of the FADOI-NoTEVole study

Research Assessment and Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism Risk Based on the Electronic Medical Record

The effect of obligatory Padua prediction scoring in hospitalized medically ill patients: A retrospective cohort study

Development and validation of a scoring system for in‐hospital mortality following band ligation in esophageal variceal bleeding