Many cancer patients are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during hospitalisation; nevertheless, thromboprophylaxis is frequently underused. Electronic alerts (e-alerts) have been associated with improvement in thromboprophylaxis use and a reduction of the incidence of VTE, both during hospitalisation and after discharge, particularly in the medical setting. However, there are no data regarding the benefit of this tool in cancer patients. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of a computer-alert system for VTE prevention in patients with cancer, particularly in those admitted to the Oncology/Haematology ward, comparing the results with the rest of inpatients at a university teaching hospital. The study included 32,167 adult patients hospitalised during the first semesters of years 2006 to 2010, 9,265 (28.8%) with an active malignancy. Appropriate prophylaxis in medical patients, significantly increased over time (from 40% in 2006 to 57% in 2010) and was maintained over 80% in surgical patients. However, while e-alerts were associated with a reduction of the incidence of VTE during hospitalisation in patients without cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.64), the impact was modest in cancer patients (OR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.42-1.86) and no benefit was observed in patients admitted to the Oncology/Haematology Departments (OR 1.11; 95% CI, 0.45-2.73). Interestingly, 60% of VTE episodes in cancer patients during recent years developed despite appro

An ImCU led by hospitalists showed encouraging results regarding patient survival and SAPS II is an useful tool for prognostic evaluation in this population. Intermediate care serves as an expansion of role for hospitalists; and clinicians, trainees and patients may benefit from co-management and teaching opportunities at this unique level of care.

Objectives: The prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a priority for improved safety in hospitalised patients. Worldwide, there is growing concern over the undersuse of appropriate thromboprophylaxis. Computerised decision support improves the implementation of thromboprophylaxis and reduces inpatient VTE. However, an economic assessment of this approach has not yet been performed. Objectives: To evaluate the economic impact of an electronic alert (e-alert) system to prevent VTE in hospitalised patients over a 4 year period. Patients/methods: All hospitalised patients at a single institution during the first semesters of 2005-2009 (n = 32 280) were included. All cases of VTE developed during hospitalisation were followed and direct costs of diagnosis and management collected. Results: E-alerts achieved a sustained reduction of the incidence of in-hospital VTE, OR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.29-0.84), the impact being especially significant in medical patients, OR 0.44 (95% CI, 0.22-0.86). No increase in prophylaxis-related bleeding was observed. In our setting, the mean direct cost (during hospitalisation and after discharge) of an in-hospital VTE episode is euro7058. Direct costs per single hospitalised patient were reduced after e-alerts from euro21.6 to euro11.8, while the increased use of thromboprophylaxis and the development of e-alerts meant euro3 and euro0.35 per patient, respectively. Thus, the implementation of e-alerts led to a net cost saving of euro6.5 per hospitalised patient. Should all hospitalised patients in Spain be considered, total yearly savings would approach euro30 million. Conclusions: E-alerts are useful and cost-effective tools for thromboprophylaxis strategy in hospitalised patients. Fewer thromboembolic complications and lower costs are achieved by its implementation