Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BackgroundCritically ill patients are at high risk of morbidity and mortality caused by venous thromboembolism (VTE). In addition to premorbid predisposing conditions, critically ill patients may be exposed to prolonged immobility, invasive intravascular catheters and frequent operative procedures, and further may have contraindications to pharmaceutical prophylactic measures designed to attenuate VTE risk. There are limited data describing current VTE prophylaxis regimens in Australia and New Zealand.ObjectiveTo document current Australian and New Zealand management of VTE prophylaxis in a large mixed cohort of critically ill patients.DesignProspective, multicentre point prevalence survey endorsed by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group (ANZICS CTG).Setting30 public hospital ICUs in Australia and New Zealand surveyed on Wednesday 9 May 2007.MethodsFor all patients in each ICU on the study day, demographic data, admission diagnosis and information on VTE prophylaxis were prospectively collected.Results502 patients were included in the survey, and 431 of these (86%) received VTE prophylaxis. Of these, 64% (276/431) received pharmacological prophylaxis and 80% (345/431) received mechanical prophylaxis, with 44% (190/431) receiving both. Of those receiving pharmacological prophylaxis, unfractionated heparin was used in 74%, and enoxaparin (low molecular weight heparin) in 23%. Contraindications to pharmacological prophylaxis were reported in 122 patients. Overall, pharmacological prophylaxis was administered to 87% of potentially suitable patients.ConclusionsWe observed a high prevalence of VTE prophylaxis, with many critically ill patients receiving two or more modalities of prophylaxis. These results show that the potential risk of VTE in critically ill patients is recognised in Australia and New Zealand, and strategies to mitigate this serious complication are widely implemented.



Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine

Publication Date





9 - 15


Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, VIC.


VTE Point Prevalence Investigators for the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group, Humans, Critical Illness, Heparin, Fibrinolytic Agents, Anticoagulants, Health Care Surveys, Prospective Studies, Intermittent Pneumatic Compression Devices, Electronic Mail, Adult, Aged, Middle Aged, Intensive Care Units, Australia, New Zealand, Female, Male, Venous Thromboembolism