Derivation and Validation of a Risk Factor Model to Identify Medical Inpatients at Risk for Venous Thromboembolism
Recommended Citation
Rothberg MB, Hamilton A, Greene MT, Fox J, Lisheba O, Milinovich A, Gautier TN, Kim P, Kaatz S, and Hu B. Derivation and Validation of a Risk Factor Model to Identify Medical Inpatients at Risk for Venous Thromboembolism. Thromb Haemost 2021.
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
11-16-2021
Publication Title
Thrombosis and haemostasis
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized medical patients at high risk for VTE. Multiple risk assessment models exist, but few have been compared in large data sets.
METHODS: We constructed a derivation cohort using 6 years of data from 13 hospitals to identify risk factors associated with developing VTE within 14 days of admission. VTE was identified using a complex algorithm combining administrative codes and clinical data. We developed a multivariable prediction model and applied it to 2 validation cohorts: a temporal cohort, including two additional years and a cross-validation, in which we refit the model excluding one hospital at a time, and applied the refitted model to the holdout hospital. Performance was evaluated using the C-statistic.
RESULTS: The derivation cohort included 160,928 patients with a 14-day VTE rate of 0.79%. The final multivariable model contained 13 patient risk factors. The model had an optimism corrected C-statistic of 0.80 and good calibration. The temporal validation cohort included 55,301 patients, with a VTE rate of 0.74%. Based on the c-statistic, the Cleveland Clinic Model (CCM) outperformed the Padua model (0.76 vs. 0.72, p<0.01). The CCM was more sensitive (65.8% vs. 60.4%, p=0.05) and more specific (74.9% vs. 71.4%, p<.001), with higher positive (1.9% vs. 1.5%, p<.001) and negative predictive values (99.7% vs. 99.6%, p=0.01). C-statistics for the CCM at individual hospitals ranged from 0.64 to 0.76.
CONCLUSION: A new VTE risk assessment model outperformed the Padua model. After further validation it could be recommended for widespread use.
PubMed ID
34784645
ePublication
ePub ahead of print