We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, U.S. GOV'T, NON-P.H.S.
Venous thromboembolism in a rehabilitation setting after major lower-extremity amputation.
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2005 January
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of venous thromboembolic disease (VTED) and impact on functional outcome in patients with major lower-extremity (LE) amputation admitted to an inpatient rehabilitation unit.
DESIGN: Retrospective medical records review.
SETTING: Acute inpatient rehabilitation unit in a tertiary, urban academic medical center.
PARTICIPANTS: Fifty consecutive patients admitted to an acute inpatient rehabilitation unit after a major LE amputation. Participants were screened at rehabilitation admission for LE deep vein thrombosis using duplex ultrasonography.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. Main outcome measures VTED incidence, FIM instrument, total rehabilitation charges, and length of stay (LOS).
RESULTS: Six of 50 patients (12%) had evidence of VTED. The VTED cohort had significantly lower admission and discharge FIM scores than the no-VTED cohort (admission FIM score, 57.2 vs 76.0; discharge FIM score, 66.0 vs 90.1, respectively; P< or =.02). Subjects with VTED had a longer rehabilitation LOS (22.8d vs 13.9d, respectively; P=.02) and higher total rehabilitation charges (28,314 US dollars vs 17,724 US dollars, respectively; P<.05).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, VTED prevalence after LE amputation in a rehabilitation setting was 12%. Subjects with VTED had lower admission and discharge functional status, longer LOS, and higher hospital charges. The utility of screening duplex ultrasound examinations at rehabilitation admission remains unclear.
DESIGN: Retrospective medical records review.
SETTING: Acute inpatient rehabilitation unit in a tertiary, urban academic medical center.
PARTICIPANTS: Fifty consecutive patients admitted to an acute inpatient rehabilitation unit after a major LE amputation. Participants were screened at rehabilitation admission for LE deep vein thrombosis using duplex ultrasonography.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. Main outcome measures VTED incidence, FIM instrument, total rehabilitation charges, and length of stay (LOS).
RESULTS: Six of 50 patients (12%) had evidence of VTED. The VTED cohort had significantly lower admission and discharge FIM scores than the no-VTED cohort (admission FIM score, 57.2 vs 76.0; discharge FIM score, 66.0 vs 90.1, respectively; P< or =.02). Subjects with VTED had a longer rehabilitation LOS (22.8d vs 13.9d, respectively; P=.02) and higher total rehabilitation charges (28,314 US dollars vs 17,724 US dollars, respectively; P<.05).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, VTED prevalence after LE amputation in a rehabilitation setting was 12%. Subjects with VTED had lower admission and discharge functional status, longer LOS, and higher hospital charges. The utility of screening duplex ultrasound examinations at rehabilitation admission remains unclear.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app