{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031007751937984496, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014470284237726097, 'mean_word_length': 4.902439024390244, '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}}
Inadequate use of prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in Danish medical departments.

INTRODUCTION
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) constitutes a major risk factor in hospitalized acutely ill medical patients. It has been demonstrated in numerous papers that by using different forms of prophylaxis, a significant reduction of the incidence of VTE can be achieved. In this article we assessed the tendencies in the use of venous thromboprophylaxis (TP) at internal medicine departments in Denmark. The results were compared with results from a similar study conducted in 2005.


MATERIAL AND METHODS
All medical departments in Denmark received a two-page questionnaire on TP. The recipients were asked to evaluate the frequency, use of local instructions, form of administration, side-effects and duration of TP at their departments. One reminder was sent out.


RESULTS
A total of 188 responses were received (90% response rate), 16 were excluded. Virtually all departments indicated that they used TP (92%). At intensive care units, the TP was used according to local guidelines at 77% of the wards and at the other subspecialties of internal medicine, TP was used in less than 50%. By far the most frequently used prophylaxis method was low molecular weight heparin, which was used by more than 80% of the departments. Side-effects, most often superficial bleeding and haematomas, were reported in 25% of the cases. The following serious side-effects were reported: heparininduced thrombocytopenia (n = 2), stroke (n = 1) and gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 3). No difference was observed between the hospitals of larger cities and those of smaller cities.


CONCLUSION
In Denmark, no significant increase in the use of TP at internal medicine departments has been observed since 2005. The guideline's strong recommendation of TP is still not reflected in daily practice.


FUNDING
not relevant.


TRIAL REGISTRATION
not relevant.