Article Text

Download PDFPDF
King’s lower limb immobilisation VTE risk assessment tool (K4 score) in conservatively treated ambulatory patients: a 2-year review
  1. Elizabeth Marrinan1,2,
  2. Victoria Speed2,3,
  3. Gerard Giron2,
  4. Loizos Georgiou2,
  5. Rhys Harris4,
  6. Mohammad Al-Agil5,
  7. Lara N Roberts2,
  8. Raj Patel2,
  9. Roopen Arya2,
  10. Julia Czuprynska2
  1. 1Institute of Pharmaceutical Science, King's College London, London, UK
  2. 2King's Thrombosis Centre, Department of Haematological Medicine, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  3. 3Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  4. 4Physiotherapy, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  5. 5CogStack Team, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Elizabeth Marrinan; elizabeth.marrinan{at}kcl.ac.uk

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Lower limb immobilisation increases venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. However, as the risk is low (0.6–2%), it is preferable to use a risk assessment tool to determine who should receive prophylaxis.1 Various VTE risk assessments for lower limb immobilisation exist.2 King’s College Hospital (KCH) Trust employs a simple four-item risk assessment tool (the K4 score) (figure 1), which was derived from local expert opinion and implemented in 2016. Risk assessment is a mandatory field during electronic referral from the EDs or urgent care centres (UCCs) to the orthopaedic team. We report VTE risk assessment rate, prescription for weight-based thromboprophylaxis and incidence of VTE within 90 days, over a 2-year period at our Trust, which includes two EDs and their associated UCCs . There was no patient or public involvement in the design, and no ethical approval was required …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Handling editor David Metcalfe

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests RA has received speaker fees from Cardinal Health and Sanofi. The authors have no other competing interests or funding to declare.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.