Medikal Bölümlerde Yatan Hastalarda Venöz Tromboembolizm Riskine Yönelik Hemşirelik Tanısı ve Girişimlerinin Belirlenmesi: Nokta Prevalans Çalışması

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı medikal bölümlerde yatan hastalarda Venöz Tromboemboli (VTE) riski için hemşirelik tanısı ve girişimlerinin belirlenmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışma, tanımlayıcı türde nokta prevalans çalışmasıdır. Çalışmanın yapıldığı 21 Şubat 2024 tarihinde 211 yatan hastadan, dahil edilme ve hariç tutulma kriterlerini karşılayan 157 hasta çalışmanın örneklemini oluşturmuştur. Veriler, çalışma için hazırlanan veri toplama formu, hemşire gözlem formu ve elektronik hasta dosyasından toplanmıştır. Bulgular: Serviste yatan hastaların ortalama yaşı 58,8±16,6 yıl, yoğun bakım ünitesinde (YBÜ) yatan hastaların ortalama yaşı ise 65±18,6 yıl idi. Bu hastaların ortalama yatış süresi serviste 21,1±5,3 gün, YBÜ'de ise 17,2±13,9 gündü. Servis ve YBÜ'de yatan hastaların IMPROVE VTE risk ve IMPROVE kanama düzeyleri arasında fark olduğu (p<0,05) ve hastaların yarısından fazlasının orta ve yüksek düzeyde VTE riski taşıdığı görülmüştür. Belirlenen hemşirelik tanıları; yetersiz bilgi (00123), etkin olmayan periferik doku perfüzyonu riski (00228), kanama riski (00206) (%68,7, %29,9, %24,2) ve hemşirelik müdahaleleri; laboratuvar verilerinin yorumlanması (7690), bilişsel uyarım (4720), öğretim: bireysel (5606), egzersiz tedavisi: eklem hareketliliği (0224), pozisyon verme (0840), cilt gözetimi'dir (3590), (100%, 100%, 68,7%, 74,5%, 36,3%, 33,1%). Sonuç: Bu çalışmadan elde edilen veriler, medikal bölümlerde yatan hastaların yarısından fazlasının VTE riski altında olduğunu ve VTE ilişkili hemşirelik tanıları ve müdahalelerinin daha az sıklıkta yapıldığını göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Venöz Tromboemboli
• Hemşirelik Tanısı
• Hemşirelik Girişimi IMPROVE VTE Risk Modeli

Destekleyen Kurum

yok

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma sırasında araştırmacılar, Helsinki Deklarasyonu ilkelerine uygun şekilde çalışmalarını yürütmüştür. Araştırmanın etik kurul onayı Hacettepe Üni,versitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Araştırma Etik Kurulu tarafından alınmıştır (Araştırma No: SBA24/029, Karar No: 2024/01-16, Tarih: 9.1.2024). Araştırmanın uygulanması için kurum izni ve katılımcılardan yazılı aydınlatılmış onam alınmıştır.

Teşekkür

yok

Assessment of Nursing Diagnosis and Interventions for the Risk of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients Hospitalized in Medical Wards: A Point Prevalence Study

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study was to assessment nursing diagnosis and interventions for the risk of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) in patients hospitalized in medical wards. Material and Methods: The study is a point prevalence study of a descriptive type. On February 21, 2024, when the study was conducted, 157 patients out of 211 inpatients who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria formed the study sample. Data were collected using the data collection form prepared for the study, the nurse observation form, and the electronic health record. Results: The mean age of patients admitted to the ward was 58.8±16.6 years, while the mean age of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) was 65±18.6 years. The mean length of stay for these patients was 21.1±5.3 days in the ward and 17.2±13.9 days in the ICU. There was a difference between the IMPROVE VTE risk and IMPROVE bleeding levels of patients in the ward and ICU (p<0.05), and it was observed that more than half of the patients had moderate to high VTE risk. The identified nursing diagnoses are: insufficient knowledge (00123), risk of ineffective peripheral tissue perfusion (00228), risk of bleeding (00206) (68.7%, 29.9%, 24.2%), and nursing interventions: interpretation of laboratory data (7690), cognitive stimulation (4720), teaching: individual (5606), exercise therapy: joint mobility (0224), positioning (0840), skin surveilance (3590), (100%, 100%, 68.7%, 74.5%, 36.3%, 33.1%). Conclusion: The data obtained from this study show that more than half of the patients hospitalized in medical wards are at risk of VTE and that VTE-related nursing diagnoses and interventions are performed less frequently.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Venous Thromboembolism
• IMPROVE VTE Risk Model
• VTE Prevention
• Nursing Diagnosis
• Nursing Interventions

Destekleyen Kurum

N/A

Etik Beyan

During this study, researchers conducted their work in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Hacettepe University Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (Research No: SBA24/029, Decision No: 2024/01-16, Date: 9.1.2024). Institutional permission was obtained for the implementation of the research, and written informed consent was obtained from the participants.

Teşekkür

N/A

Kaynakça

1. 1. Jiménez, D., Bikdeli, B., Quezada, A., Muriel, A., Lobo, JL., de Miguel-Diez, J., Jara-Palomares, L., Ruiz-Artacho, P., Yusen. R.D., Monreal, M. (2019). Hospital volume and outcomes for acute pulmonary embolism: multinational population based cohort study. BMJ. 29;366:l4416. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4416.
2. 2. Spyropoulos AC, Anderson FA Jr, FitzGerald G, et al. Predictive and associative models to identify hospitalized medical patients at risk for VTE. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18(9):2209-2221. doi:10.1111/jth.14917
3. 3. Nathan N. A Silent Killer: Insights ınto venous thromboembolism formation and prevention. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 2017;125(2):367, doı: 10.1213/ane.0000000000002309.
4. 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What is venous thromboembolism? 2023. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/dvt/facts.html
5. 5. Di Minno A, Ambrosino P, Calcaterra I, Di Minno MND. COVID-19 and venous thromboembolism: a meta-analysis of literature studies. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2020;46(7):763-771. doi:10.1055/s-0040-17154564
6. 6. Baccellieri D, Bertoglio L, Apruzzi L, Ardita V, D’Angelo A, Bossi M, et al. Incidence of deep venous thrombosis in COVID-19 hospitalized patients during the first peak of the Italian outbreak. Phlebology. 2021;36(5):375-383.
7. 7. Neeman E, Liu V, Mishra P, Thai KK, Xu J, Clancy HA, et al. Trends and risk factors for venous thromboembolism among hospitalized medical patients. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(11):e2240373. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.40373
8. 8. Gregson J, Kaptoge S, Bolton T, et al. Cardiovascular risk factors associated with venous thromboembolism. JAMA Cardiol. 2019;4(2):163-173. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2018.4537

9. 9. Geerts WH, Bergqvist D, Pineo GF, Heit JA, Samama CM, Lassen MR, Colwell CW. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. Chest. 2008;133(6 Suppl):381S-453S. doi:10.1378/chest.08-0656
10. 10. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Venous thromboembolism in over 16s: reducing the risk of hospital-acquired deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. London: NICE; 2018 Mar. PMID:29697228
11. 11. Sağlık Bakanlığı. Hastane ilişkili venöz tromboembolilerin önlenmesi rehberi 2022. Hasta Güvenliği Serisi. Ankara: Sağlık Bakanlığı; 2022 Oct. ISBN:978-975-590-869-4. Yayın No:1254. Erişim Adresi: https://shgmkalitedb.saglik.gov.tr/TR-105709. Erişim Tarihi 31.12.2025
12. 12. Clapham RE, Marrinan E, Roberts LN. VTE prevention in medical inpatients—current approach and controversies. Thromb Update. 2023;13:100151. doi:10.1016/j.tru.2023.100151
13. 13. Han M, Huang J, Yang J, Chen J, Qi H. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of guidelines for venous thromboembolism prevention and management: a mixed-methods systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud Adv. 2024;8:100273. doi:10.1016/j.ijnsa.2024.100273
14. 14. Ma YF, Xu Y, Chen YP, Wang XJ, Deng HB, He Y, Wu XJ. Nurses' objective knowledge regarding venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: a national survey study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97(14):e0338. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000010338
15. 15. Al-Mugheed K, Bayraktar N. Knowledge, risk assessment, practices, self-efficacy, attitudes, and behaviours towards venous thromboembolism among nurses: a systematic review. Nurs Open. 2023;10:6033-6044. doi:10.1002/nop2.1914
16. 16. Yan T, He W, Hang C, Qin L, Qian L, Jia Z, et al. Nurses’ knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors toward venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: how to do better. Vascular. 2021;29(1):78-84. doi:10.1177/1708538120933782
17. 17. Barp M, Carneiro VSM, Amaral KVA, Pagotto V, Malaquias SG. Nursing care in the prevention of venous thromboembolism: an integrative review. Rev Eletr Enf. 2018;20:v20a14. doi:10.5216/ree.v20.48735
18. 18. Hebeshy MI, Hansen DM, Broome B, Abou AS, Murrock C, Bernert D. Development of the nurses’ intention to use deep vein thrombosis preventive measures questionnaire. J Nurs Meas. 2020;28(3):E216-E232. doi:10.1891/JNM-D-19-00011
19. 19. Tung EC, Yu SY, Shah K, Kinkade A, Tejani AM. Reassessment of venous thromboembolism and bleeding risk in medical patients receiving VTE prophylaxis. J Eval Clin Pract. 2020;26:18-25. doi:10.1111/jep.13213
20. 20. Gomes ET, Assunção MCT, Lins EM, Püschel VAA. Nursing in mechanical prevention of venous thromboembolism in surgical patients. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2021;55:e03738. doi:10.1590/S1980-220X2020002703738
21. 21. Rosenberg DJ, Press A, Fishbein J, Lesser M, McCullagh L, McGinn T, Spyropoulos AC. External validation of the IMPROVE bleeding risk assessment model in medical patients. Thromb Haemost. 2016;116(3):530-536. doi:10.1160/TH16-01-0003
22. 22. Herdman TH, Kamitsuru S, Takáo Lopes C. NANDA International nursing diagnoses: definitions and classification 2021–2023. 12th ed. New York: Thieme; 2021.
23. 23. Le P, Martinez KA, Pappas MA, Rothberg MB. A decision model to estimate a risk threshold for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients. J Thromb Haemost. 2017;15:1132-1141. doi:10.1111/jth.13687
24. 24. Lam BD, Dodge LE, Datta S, Rosovsky RP, Robertson W, Lake L, et al. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for hospitalized adult patients: a survey of US health care providers on attitudes and practices. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2023;7(6):102168. doi:10.1016/j.rpth.2023.102168
25. 25. Abboud J, Shaikh N, Moosa M, Dempster M, Adair P. Increasing venous thromboembolism risk assessment through a whole hospital-based intervention: a pre-post service evaluation to demonstrate quality improvement. Int J Qual Health Care. 2024;36(1):mzae019. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzae019
26. 26. Häfliger E, Kopp B, Darbellay Farhoumand P, Choffat D, Rossel JB, Rent R, et al. Risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in medical inpatients. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(5):e249980. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.9980
27. 27. Bakhsh E. The benefits and imperative of venous thromboembolism risk screening for hospitalized patients: a systematic review. J Clin Med. 2023;12:7009. doi:10.3390/jcm12227009
28. 28. Silva JS, Lee J, Grisante DL, Lopes JL, Lopes CT. Nurses’ knowledge, risk assessment, and self-efficacy regarding venous thromboembolism. Acta Paul Enferm. 2020;33:eAPE20190125. doi:10.37689/acta-ape/2020AO0125
29. 29. Nana M, Shute C, Williams R, Kokwaro F, Riddick K, Lane H. Multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach to improving compliance with venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in a district general hospital. BMJ Open Qual. 2020;9(3):e000680. doi:10.12788/jhm.3290
30. 30. Yüksel B, Arlı SK. Nurses’ knowledge and practice in venous thromboembolism prevention: development and validation of a scale. Nurse Educ Pract. 2026;90:104660. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104660