Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 371–374 | Cite as

Rationale supporting an “opt-out” policy for pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients



Pulmonary embolism is the number one cause of preventable death among hospitalized patients. Prescription of either low dose low molecular weight heparin, such as enoxaparin or dalteparin, or prescription of low dose fondaparinux can halve the rate of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, without increasing major bleeding complications. Nevertheless, there has been a “failure-to-prophylax” syndrome, especially among hospitalized medical patients at risk. One approach is to mandate venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for these patients without exception or flexibility. The alternative approach is to institute or maintain an “opt-out” policy so that the responsible clinician can make the final decision as to whether the benefits of prophylaxis outweigh the risks. This paper, makes the case for an “opt-out” policy, so that we can personalize, individualize, and humanize our medical care. Such an approach permits flexibility, encourages collaborative “buy-in” to the concept of prophylaxis, and allows the clinician to withhold anticoagulation in special situations that do not fit prespecified protocols. Ultimately, such an “opt-out” policy might make VTE prophylaxis more effective by avoiding anticoagulation of low thrombosis risk patients who are at high risk of bleeding complications.


Venous thromboembolism Pulmonary embolism Deep vein thrombosis Prophylaxis 


  1. 1.
    The Surgeon General’s call to action to prevent deep vein thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism. Accessed 1 Oct 2011
  2. 2.
    Dentali F, Douketis JD, Gianni M, Lim W, Crowther MA (2007) Meta-analysis: anticoagulant prophylaxis to prevent symptomatic venous thromboembolism in hospitalized medical patients. Ann Intern Med 146:278–288PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anderson FA Jr, Zayaruzny M, Heit JA, Fidan D, Cohen AT (2007) Estimated annual numbers of US acute-care hospital patients at risk for venous thromboembolism. Am J Hematol 82:777–782PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Piazza G, Seddighzadeh A, Goldhaber SZ (2007) Double trouble for 2,609 hospitalized medical patients who developed deep vein thrombosis: prophylaxis omitted more often and pulmonary embolism more frequent. Chest 132:554–561PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Amin A, Stemkowski S, Lin J, Yang G (2007) Thromboprophylaxis rates in US medical centers: success or failure? J Thromb Haemost 5:1610–1616PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kahn SR, Panju A, Geerts W, Pineo GF, Desjardins L, Turpie AG, Glezer S, Thabane L, Sebaldt RJ (2007) Multicenter evaluation of the use of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients in Canada. Thromb Res 119:145–155PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cohen AT, Tapson VF, Bergmann JF, Goldhaber SZ, Kakkar AK, Deslandes B, Huang W, Zayaruzny M, Emery L, Anderson FA Jr (2008) Venous thromboembolism risk and prophylaxis in the acute hospital care setting (ENDORSE study): a multinational cross-sectional study. Lancet 371:387–394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kucher N, Koo S, Quiroz R, Cooper JM, Paterno MD, Soukonnikov B, Goldhaber SZ (2005) Electronic alerts to prevent venous thromboembolism among hospitalized patients. N Engl J Med 352:969–977PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Piazza G, Goldhaber SZ (2006) Venous thromboembolism guidebook: fifth edition. Crit Pathw Cardiol 5:211–227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lecumberri R, Panizo E, Gomez-Guiu A, Varea S, Garcia-Quetglas E, Serrano M, Garcia-Mouriz A, Marques M, Gomez-Outes A, Paramo JA (2011) Economic impact of an electronic alert system to prevent venous thromboembolism in hospitalised patients. J Thromb Haemost 9:1108–1115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fiumara K, Piovella C, Hurwitz S, Piazza G, Niles CM, Fanikos J, Paterno M, Labreche M, Stevens LA, Baroletti S, Goldhaber SZ (2010) Multi-screen electronic alerts to augment venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Thromb Haemost 103:312–317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Piazza G, Goldhaber SZ (2009) Computerized decision support for the cardiovascular clinician: applications for venous thromboembolism prevention and beyond. Circulation 120:1133–1137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cardiovascular Medicine DivisionBrigham and Women’s HospitalBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations