Prevention of venous thrombosis through intraoperative intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC): a best practice implementation project
Xiaohong Zhang,Huihui Tu,Qian Yin,Dongping Li,Liuyue Wang,Shuai Cao,Ju Ma,Xiaopei Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02221-3
2024-08-13
Abstract:Introduction: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a common and potentially fatal post-surgery complication. Research has shown that 50% of VTE causes are intraoperative, with the risk of occurrence highest during and immediately post-surgery. Therefore, strategies for early assessment and prevention should be established. Objective: To identify optimal equipment selection, compression protocols, and strategies for complication prevention and management during intraoperative intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC), this study aims to synthesize the best available evidence. The objective is to inform accurate risk assessment and facilitate early mechanical prophylaxis against venous thrombosis. Methods: The Practical Application to Clinical Evidence model proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute was utilized. Indicators were identified using the available best evidence from January 2023 to October 2023, and a baseline review was conducted. Negative factors were identified based on clinical evidence-based practice. The implementation rates of different indicators before (n = 372) and after (n = 405) evidence-based practice, the incidence rates of intraoperative IPC-related adverse events and VTE, and the risk of venous thrombosis before (n = 50) and after (n = 50) practice were identified and compared. Furthermore, medical staff's knowledge of best practices for intraoperative IPC was assessed through pre- and post-intervention surveys involving 109 operating room personnel. Results: All review indicators significantly improved (P < 0.01) after the evidence-based practice, and 9 reached 100%. Two intraoperative venous thrombosis events occurred before the evidence-based practice, with an incidence rate of 0.53%; no intraoperative venous thrombosis event occurred after the evidence-based practice, with no significant difference (X2 = 2.171, P = 0.141 > 0.05). However, there were significant differences in intraoperative venous blood hemodynamics before and after the practice (P < 0.05). Moreover, 9 IPC-related adverse events, including 4 cases of skin pressure, 3 cases of skin allergy, and 2 cases of lower limb circulation disorders, were reported before the evidence-based practice, with an incidence rate of 2.4%. Notably, no intraoperative IPC-associated adverse events occurred after the evidence-based practice(X2 = 9.913, P < 0.01). Meanwhile, the score of comprehension of the standard utilization of IPC for preventing venous thrombosis by medical staff in the operating room was 93.34 ± 3.64 after the evidence-based practice, which was higher than that (67.55 ± 5.45) before the evidence-based practice. Overall, the clinical practice was significantly improved the evidence-based practice. Conclusions: Applying intraoperative IPC utilization standards based on the best evidence in clinical practice effectively reduces the intraoperative IPC-associated adverse event rate and the risks of intraoperative venous thrombosis. It also improves the execution rates and compliance with mechanical prevention standards in the operating room by medical staff. Future research should prioritize the development and refinement of best clinical practices for intraoperative venous thrombosis prevention, with a particular emphasis on the integration of mechanical prophylaxis strategies.