BACKGROUND: While there have been marked advances in diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for venous thromboembolism, our understanding of its clinical epidemiology is based on studies conducted more than a decade ago.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this observational study was to describe the incidence and attack rates of venous thromboembolism in residents of the Worcester Statistical Metropolitan Area in 1999. We also describe demographic and clinical characteristics, management strategies, and associated hospital and 30-day outcomes.
DESIGN AND MEASUREMENTS: The medical records of all residents from Worcester, MA (2000 census=477.800), diagnosed with International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision (ICD-9) codes consistent with possible venous thromboembolism during 1999 were independently validated, classified, and reviewed by trained abstractors.
RESULTS: A total of 587 subjects were enrolled with validated venous thromboembolism. The incidence and attack rates of venous thromboembolism were 104 and 128 per 100,000 population, respectively. Three quarters of patients developed their venous thromboembolism in the outpatient setting — a substantial proportion of these patients had undergone recent surgery or had a recent prior hospitalization. Less than half of the patients received anticoagulant prophylaxis during high-risk periods before their venous thromboembolism. Thirty-day rates of venous thromboembolism recurrence, major bleeding, and mortality were 4.8%, 7.7%, and 6.6%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: These data provide insights into recent incidence and attack rates, changing patient profiles, management strategies, and subsequent outcomes in patients with venous thromboembolism. The underutilization of prophylaxis before venous thromboembolism, and relatively high 30-day recurrence rates, suggest a continued need for the improvement of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and management in the community.
venous thromboembolism deep vein thrombosis pulmonary embolism population-health
Morbidity and Mortality: 1998 Chartbook on Cardiovascular, Lung and Blood Diseases. National Institutes of Health. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute October, 1998.Google Scholar
Anderson FA, Wheeler HB, Goldberg RJ, et al. A population-based perspective of the hospital incidence and case-fatality rates of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. The Worcester DVT Study. Arch Intern Med. 1991;151:933–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson FA Jr., Wheeler HB, Goldberg RJ, Hosmer DW, Forcier A, Patwardin NA. Physician practices in the prevention of venous thromboembolism. Ann Intern Med. 1991;115:591–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Silverstein MD, Heit JA, Mohr DN, Petterson TM, O’Fallon WM, Melton JL. Trends in the incidence of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. A 25-year population-based study. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:585–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson FA Jr., Wheeler HB, Goldberg RJ, Hosmer DW, Forcier A, Patwardhan NA. Prospective study of the impact of continuing medical education and quality assurance programs on use of prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:669–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clagett GP, Anderson FA Jr., Heit J, Levine MN, Wheeler HB. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. Chest. 1995;108:312S-34S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopman MMW, Prandoni P, Piovella F, et al. Treatment of venous thromboembolism with intravenous unfractionated heparin administered in the hospital as compared with subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin administered in the home. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:682–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine M, Gent M, Hirsch J, et al. A comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin administered primarily at home with unfractionated heparin administered in the hospital for proximal deep-vein thrombosis. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:677–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heit JA, Mohr DN, Silverstein MD, Petterson TM, O’Fallon WM, Melton JL. Predictors of recurrence after deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. A population-based cohort study. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:761–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar