{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01641025641025641, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0020512820512820513, 'mean_word_length': 5.777777777777778, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Cost-effectiveness of the prevention of postoperative thromboembolism].

Awareness of cost-effectiveness aspects has become increasingly important within the health care sector in times of constrained resources. Health economics deal with methods of making choices under conditions of uncertainty and provide models for decision making. A key question is to compare alternative strategies. Within the field of prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism general thromboprophylaxis is cost-effective provided that the frequency of deep vein thrombosis is higher than 10%. Diagnostic screening and selective treatment of detected thrombosis is always the least cost-effective alternative. Although detailed analyses are still lacking it seems as if the use of low molecular weight heparins is more cost-effective than unfractionated low dose heparin. Besides saving lives by preventing fatal pulmonary embolism an adequate thromboprophylaxis also will provide monetary savings.