- M J Oakley, specialist registrara,
- E F Wheelwright, consultantb,
- P J James, consultanta
- a Orthopaedic Directorate, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow G4 0SF
- b Orthopaedic Directorate, Stobhill Hospital NHS Trust, Glasgow G21 3UW
- Correspondence to: Mr James
- Accepted 19 May 1997
Introduction
Prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism after joint replacement remains contentious.1 The incidence of deep vein thrombosis is between 45% and 75%.2 3 4 5 The rate of fatal pulmonary embolism is considered to be 1-3%,2 3 4 5 but this is a gross overestimate.1 Pharmacological techniques for preventing deep vein thrombosis (such as dextran 40, aspirin, warfarin, and heparins) are effective in reducing its incidence but are associated with important complications such as haemorrhage, wound haematoma, and haemarthrosis. 3 6 7 8
Mechanical methods such as intermittent pneumatic compression devices have been developed to avoid these problems. These provide similar prophylaxis against deep vein thrombosis 8 9 10 and are considered free of important complications.8 We report the occurrence of ulcers in patients using these devices according to approved guidelines.
Guidelines
Consideration of the evidence led the orthopaedic directorate of Glasgow Royal Infirmary and Stobhill NHS Trust to change its policy on prophylaxis against deep vein thrombosis at the end of 1995. Under the previous protocol heparin had been used in combination with graduated compression stockings. All patients having elective surgery who are at moderate or high risk of deep vein thrombosis now wear graduated compression stockings on both legs under pneumatic compression boots (AV Impulse System, Novamedix, Andover) (fig 1 …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The decline in the breast cancer incidence is 1.2% and it is not significant.
Published 10 February 2012
'twas ever thus
Published 10 February 2012
The value of historic human remains
Published 10 February 2012
In Praise of British Literature
Published 10 February 2012
Is real shared decision making possible?
Published 10 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Search for evidence goes on (5 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012