Use of a Heparin Nomogram for Treatment of Patients with Venous Thromboembolism in a Community Hospital

Summary

Background: The application of a heparin dosing nomogram in the treatment of patients with venous thromboembolism resulted in improvement of heparin therapy in clinical research settings. In 1992 a heparin nomogram was introduced in our hospital, which is a community hospital where anticoagulant therapy is supervised by the attending physicians. We studied whether comparable improvements were achieved in such a non-surveyed clinical setting. Methods: Patients were identified from computerized discharge records, and classified into a pre-nomogram (discharged in 1990 or 1991) and a nomogram patient group (discharged in 1993 or 1994). The use of the nomogram was encouraged but the application remained on a voluntary basis. Since the definition of the target APTT range was different in the pre-nomogram period as compared to the nomogram period, a formal analysis of pre- and post-nomogram results was not considered justified. Results: The APTT ratio, six hours after the start of heparin treatment, was below the predefined lower limit in 72% of 127 patients in the pre-nomogram group and in 13% of 127 patients in the nomogram group. During 1043 days heparin therapy in the nomogram group the morning APTT ratio was subtherapeutic in 8%. In 58% of all APTT results the physician responded according to the nomogram. The subsequent APTT was in the target range in 64% of the cases compared to 31% if the adjustement was not performed according to the nomogram (P<.0001). Major bleeding episodes occurred in 3.1% in the pre-nomo-gram period and in 0.7% in the nomogram period.

Conclusion: The present study shows that the introduction of a heparin dosing nomogram in a non-research clinical setting results in more adequate heparin anticoagulation with low risks of bleeding.

• References

• 1 Hull R, Raskob GE, Hirsh J, Leclerc JRM, Geerts WH, Rosenbloom D, Sackett DL, Anderson C, Harrison L. Continuous intravenous heparin compared with intermittent subcutaneous heparin in the initial treatment of proximal-vein thrombosis. N Engl J Med. 1986; 315: 1109-14.
• 2 Hirsh MD. Heparin. N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 1565-74.
• 3 Fennerty A, Thomas P, Backouse G, Bentley B, Campbell IA, Routledge PA. Audit of control of heparin treatment. BMJ 1985; 290: 27-8.
• 4 Wheeler AP, Jaquiss RDB, Newman JH. Physician practices in the treatment of pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis. Arch Intern Med 1988; 148: 1321-5.
• 5 Elliot CG, Hiltunen SJ, Suchyta M. Pysician-guided treatment compared with a heparin protocol for deep vein thrombosis. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 999-1004.
• 6 Raschke RA, Reilly BM, Guidry JR, Fontana JR, Srinivas S. The weight-based heparin dosing nomogram compared with a standard care nomogram: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1993; 119: 874-81.
• 7 Cruickshank MK, Levine MN, Hirsh J, Roberts R, Siguenza M. A standard heparin nomogram for the management of heparin therapy. Arch Intern Med 1991; 151: 333-7.
• 8 Hull RD, Raskob GE, Rosenbloom D, Lemaire J, Pineo GF, Baylis B, Ginsberg JS, Panju AA, Brill-Edwards P, Brant R. Optimal therapeutic level of heparin therapy in patients with venous thrombosis. Arch Intern Med 1992; 152: 1589-95.
• 9 Brandjes DPM, Heijboer H, Büller HR, de Rijk M, Jagt H, ten Cate JW. Acenocoumarol and heparin compared with acenocoumarol alone in the initial treatment of proximal-vein thrombosis. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 1485-9.
• 10 Anand S, Ginsberg JS, Kearon C, Gent M, Hirsh J. The relation between the activated partial thromboplastin time response and recurrence in patients with venous thrombosis treated with continuous intravenous heparin. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156: 1677-81.
• 11 Hollingsworth JA, Rowe BH, Brisebois FJ, Thompson PR, Fabris LM. The successful application of a heparin nomogram in a community hospital. Arch Intern Med 1995; 155: 2095-100.
• 12 Raschke RA, Gollihare B, Peirce JC. The effectiveness of implementing the weight-based heparin nomogram as a practical guideline. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156: 1645-9.