BMJ  2007;334:1127 (2 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.39226.461516.3A

Letters

Thromboprophylaxis for adults in hospital

A mess for medical patients

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The editorial by Fitzmaurice and Murray is timely and welcome,¹ but I share many of D'Costa's concerns about the ease with which we slide between the evidence for surgical and medical prophylaxis. We are in a strong position with evidence of efficacy to provide prophylaxis for high risk medical patients, and the "high risk" criteria mandated by D'Costa seem almost identical to the list from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) for surgical patients at risk. This debate should move on and medical patients with easily identified risk factors receive prophylaxis of a comparable level to their surgical comparators (enoxoparin 40 mg, fondaparinux, or similar, with pneumatic compression). If the medical community wish to target at risk medical patients, then why not use the NICE surgical criteria and cross out the word "surgical"?

One of the references in the editorial and carried by the BMJ—the fondaparinux . . . [Full text of this article]

Derby Hospitals, Derby DE1 2QY

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Thromboprophylaxis for adults in hospital

David A Fitzmaurice and Ellen Murray
BMJ 2007 334: 1017-1018. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial

Alexander T Cohen, Bruce L Davidson, Alexander S Gallus, Michael R Lassen, Martin H Prins, Witold Tomkowski, Alexander G G Turpie, Jan F M Egberts, Anthonie W A Lensing ARTEMIS Investigators
BMJ 2006 332: 325-329. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]