Front Public Health. 2026 Jul 13;14:1876826. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1876826. eCollection 2026.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) ranks as the third most prevalent cardiovascular disease after acute myocardial infarction and stroke, posing a significant risk to patient safety. Clinical challenges such as inadequate VTE awareness among healthcare professionals, low prevention rates, untimely and inaccurate risk assessments, improper grading of preventive measures, and insufficient physician-nurse communication necessitate the development of a more effective management approach. This study aimed to design and implement a smart hospital platform-based VTE risk management system and evaluate its impact on VTE and bleeding risk assessment times, thereby enhancing clinical VTE prevention and control.
METHODS: A prospective interventional study was conducted to compare outcomes before and after the implementation of the VTE risk management system. The study population comprised inpatients at a tertiary grade A hospital. The pre-implementation cohort included patients admitted from March 1 to June 30, 2024 (n = 5,763), while the post-implementation cohort consisted of patients admitted from March 1 to June 30, 2025 (n = 5,842). The VTE risk management system was structured into five functional modules: structured assessment, stratified decision-making, intelligent alerts, physician-nurse communication, and discharge follow-up. Evaluation metrics encompassed risk assessment efficiency, process quality indicators, clinical outcome measures, and VTE knowledge levels among healthcare professionals.
RESULTS: Following system implementation, the time required for nurses to complete VTE risk assessments was reduced from 101.90 ± 15.694 s to 37.18 ± 5.701 s (p < 0.001), while the time for physicians to complete bleeding risk assessments decreased from 138.08 ± 17.348 s to 50.00 ± 9.013 s (p < 0.001). The timeliness of VTE risk assessments improved from 71.0 to 92.0% (p < 0.001), bleeding risk assessment timeliness increased from 74.0 to 94.0% (p < 0.001), dynamic risk assessment rates rose from 78.0 to 95.0% (p < 0.001), and the accuracy of risk assessments improved from 64.0 to 92.0% (p < 0.001). Additionally, the correct implementation of intervention measures increased from 75.0 to 93.0% (p = 0.001). Promising trends were also observed in clinical outcomes: the incidence of VTE among inpatients decreased from 0.316‰ to 0.098‰ (p = 0.012), and bleeding incidence from 0.432‰ to 0.180‰ (p = 0.008). The average length of hospital stay was reduced from 9.7 ± 3.1 days to 8.3 ± 2.4 days (p < 0.001). Furthermore, VTE-related knowledge among healthcare professionals improved markedly, with awareness of VTE assessment scales increasing from 76.25 to 97.50% (p < 0.001), and the proportion of staff perceiving VTE prevention as a workload burden decreasing from 65.00 to 26.25% (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The VTE risk management system developed on a smart hospital platform demonstrated marked improvements in risk assessment efficiency and process quality indicators. These findings suggest that the system is feasible and can effectively support standardized VTE management in a real-world hospital setting. However, given the pre-post study design without a concurrent control group, the observed clinical benefits should be interpreted as preliminary trends rather than definitive evidence of effectiveness. Future randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm the comparative efficacy of this integrated approach.
PMID:42517092 | PMC:PMC13402540 | DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1876826