Abstract:

Comparative analysis of risk assessment of venous thromboembolism between American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines and British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guidelines        LIU Feng-lin. Department of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China
Abstract    It is a critical issue for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) to stratify the patients into different risk levels correctly. The American College of Chest Physicians （ACCP）Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline made its recommendations of VTE prophylaxis based on the calculating score of  Caprini’s risk assessment model, a validated assessment tool for VTE risks in various clinical settings, while the updated British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Guideline established an independent procedure to judge the VTE risks in hospitalized patients. Although both approaches are evidence-based, whether they will result to equal effectiveness of risk assessment is still unknown. Moreover, no definite conclusion has been drawn on which one is more practical in the real-world clinical situation. Comprehensive understanding of the different strategies for VTE risk assessment would be helpful to clinical strategy making.

Key words: venous thromboembolism, risk assessment, guideline, American College of Chest Physicians, British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence

摘要：

对静脉血栓栓塞症（VTE）病人进行正确的危险分层是VTE预防中的重要问题。美国胸科医师学会（ACCP）指南对VTE预防措施的推荐基于Caprini风险评估模型（一项在多种临床环境中被确证有效的评测工具）的评分结果；而英国国家健康与护理卓越研究院（NICE）发布的更新指南则采取了一套独立流程以评估住院病人的VTE风险。尽管上述两种VTE评估方法均基于循证医学证据，然而尚不清楚二者是否具有相同的评估效果，更无明确结论认定何种评估方法在真实临床环境中可行性更佳。全面理解VTE风险评估的不同方法及其潜在优势和不足，将有助于我国医师对此类病人的临床决策。

关键词: 静脉血栓栓塞症, 风险评估, 指南, 美国胸科医师学会, 英国国家健康与护理卓越研究院