External validation of the IMPROVE Bleeding Risk Assessment Model in medical patients

Summary

The IMPROVE Bleed Risk Assessment Model (RAM) remains the only bleed RAM in hospitalised medical patients using 11 clinical and laboratory factors. The aim of our study was to externally validate the IMPROVE Bleed RAM. A retrospective chart review was conducted between October 1, 2012 and July 31, 2014. We applied the point scoring system to compute risk scores for each patient in the validation sample. We then dichotomised the patients into those with a score <7 (low risk) vs ≥ 7 (high risk), as outlined in the original study, and compared the rates of any bleed, non-major bleed, and major bleed. Among the 12,082 subjects, there was an overall 2.6 % rate of any bleed within 14 days of admission. There was a 2.12 % rate of any bleed in those patients with a score of < 7 and a 4.68 % rate in those with a score ≥ 7 [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.3 (95 % CI=1.8–2.9), p<0.0001]. MB rates were 1.5 % in the patients with a score of < 7 and 3.2 % in the patients with a score of ≥ 7, [OR 2.2 (95 % CI=1.6–2.9), p<0.0001]. The ROC curve was 0.63 for the validation sample. This study represents the largest externally validated Bleed RAM in a hospitalised medically ill patient population. A cut-off point score of 7 or above was able to identify a high-risk patient group for MB and any bleed. The IMPROVE Bleed RAM has the potential to allow for more tailored approaches to thromboprophylaxis in medically ill hospitalised patients.

Supplementary Material to this article is available online at www.thrombosis-online.com.

Keywords

Risk Assessment Model - validation - bleeding risk - anticoagulants - medical patients

• References

• 1 Tapson VF, Hyers TM, Waldo AL. et al. Antithrombotic therapy practices in US hospitals in an era of practice guidelines. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165: 1458-1464.
• 2 Cohen AT, Agnelli G, Anderson FA. et al. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Europe. The number of VTE events and associated morbidity and mortality. Thromb Haemost 2007; 98: 756-764.
• 3 Samama MM, Cohen AT, Darmon JY. et al. A comparison of enoxaparin with placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Prophylaxis in Medical Patients with Enoxaparin Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 793-800.
• 4 Cohen AT, Tapson VF, Bergmann JF. et al ENDORSE Investigators. Venous thromboembolism risk and prophylaxis in the acute hospital care setting (ENDORSE study): a multinational cross-sectional study. Lancet 2008; 3719610: 387-394.
• 5 Douketis JD.. Prevention of venous thromboembolism in hospitalised medical patients: addressing some practical questions. Curr Opin Pulm Med 2008; 145: 381-388.
• 6 Qaseem A, Chou R, Humphrey LL. et al. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalised patients: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155: 625-632.
• 7 Kahn SR, Lim W, Dunn AS. et al. Prevention of VTE in nonsurgical patients: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012; 141: e195S-e226S.
• 8 Spyropoulos AC, Anderson FA, Fitzgerald G. et al. Predictive and associative models to identify hospitalised medical patients at risk for VTE. Chest 2011; 140: 706-714.
• 9 Rosenberg D, Eichorn A, Alarcon M. et al. External validation of the risk assessment model of the International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE) for medical patients in a tertiary health system. J Am Heart Assoc 2014; 3: e001152.
• 10 Huang W, Anderson FA, Spencer FA. et al J. Risk-assessment models for predicting venous thromboembolism among hospitalised non-surgical patients: a systematic review. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2013; 35: 67-80.
• 11 Decousus H, Tapson VF, Bergmann JF. et al. Factors at admission associated with bleeding risk in medical patients: findings from the IMPROVE investigators. Chest 2011; 139: 69-79.
• 12 Arnason T, Wells PS, Van Walraven C. et al. Accuracy of coding for possible warfarin complications in hospital discharge abstracts. Thromb Res 2006; 118: 253-262.
• 13 Meijer K, Schulman S.. The absence of 'minor’ risk factors for recurrent venous thromboembolism: a systematic review of negative predictive values and negative likelihood ratios. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7: 1619-1628.
• 14 Hostler DC, Marx ES, Moores LK. et al. Validation of the IMPROVE Bleeding Risk Score. Chest. 2015 Epub ahead of print.
• 15 Samama MM, Cohen AT, Darmon JY. et al. A comparison of enoxaparin with placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Prophylaxis in Medical Patients with Enoxaparin Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 793-800.
• 16 Leizorovicz A, Cohen AT, Turpie AG. et al. Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of dalteparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Circulation 2004; 110: 874-879.
• 17 Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS. et al. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial. Br Med J 2006; 332: 325-329.