Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
128 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2014-01-31
2017-04-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
At Rush University Medical Center (RUMC), HIT is diagnosed through a combination of clinical factors and laboratory tests. When HIT is first suspected, a 4T HIT score, which is used to estimate the probability of true HIT, is calculated. The following score ranges correspond to the probability of true HIT; score of 0-3 indicates a low probability, score of 4-5 indicates an intermediate probability, and a score of 6-8 indicates a high probability of true HIT.
If the score indicates a likelihood of HIT, a HIT-Ab is sent off. This test has a sensitivity of more than 95% and a specificity of 74% to 86%. Accordingly, if this HIT-Ab test result is negative, HIT is ruled out. If the result is equivocal or positive, a confirmatory Serotonin Release Assay (SRA) test should be performed (sensitivity of 89% to 100% and a specificity of 88 % to 100%).
Prior to 2014, there was no formal process for evaluation of patients with HIT. In November of 2014, an EMR tool was created in an effort to improve heparin allergy documentation and HIT management. This EMR tool prompts the medical team to perform the 4T score, displays the appropriate HIT labs, alternative anticoagulation strategies, instructs the nurse to apply an allergy bracelet, and notifies the pharmacy resident through the order verification queue. The pharmacy resident then performs an independent 4T score, discontinues all heparin products, documents the heparin allergy in the medical record, and assesses the need for alternative anticoagulation.
Many studies have shown the value of the 4T HIT scoring system and the use of pharmacists in reducing the inappropriate use of alternative anticoagulation and unnecessary testing. Pharmacists have helped to improve patient outcomes and decrease costs associated with HIT. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of an EMR tool and pharmacy residents on allergy documentation and the management of HIT.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
RETROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Prior to 11/01/2014
Group prior to the implementation of an electronic medical record order panel and pharmacy resident involvement
No interventions assigned to this group
After 11/30/2014
Group after implementation of an electronic medical record order panel and pharmacy resident involvement
Electronic medical record order panel and resident involvement
Prior to 2014, there was no formal process for evaluation of patients with HIT. In November of 2014, an EMR tool was created in an effort to improve heparin allergy documentation and HIT management. This EMR tool prompts the medical team to perform the 4T score, displays the appropriate HIT labs, alternative anticoagulation strategies, instructs the nurse to apply an allergy bracelet, and notifies the pharmacy resident through the order verification queue. The pharmacy resident then performs an independent 4T score, discontinues all heparin products, documents the heparin allergy in the medical record, and assesses the need for alternative anticoagulation.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Electronic medical record order panel and resident involvement
Prior to 2014, there was no formal process for evaluation of patients with HIT. In November of 2014, an EMR tool was created in an effort to improve heparin allergy documentation and HIT management. This EMR tool prompts the medical team to perform the 4T score, displays the appropriate HIT labs, alternative anticoagulation strategies, instructs the nurse to apply an allergy bracelet, and notifies the pharmacy resident through the order verification queue. The pharmacy resident then performs an independent 4T score, discontinues all heparin products, documents the heparin allergy in the medical record, and assesses the need for alternative anticoagulation.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Aged ≥ 18 years of age
Exclusion Criteria
* Pregnancy
18 Years
90 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Rush University Medical Center
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Gary D Peksa, PharmD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Rush University Medical Center
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Rush University Medical Center
Chicago, Illinois, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Kniuksta, Ruth, Amy Mozina, and Peggy Reed.
Konkle B. Chapter 115. Disorders of Platelets and Vessel Wall. In: Longo DL, Fauci AS, Kasper DL, Hauser SL, Jameson J, Loscalzo J. eds. Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine, 18e. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2012. Accessed August 14, 2016.
Hasan M, Malalur P, Agastya M, Malik AO, Dawod Y, Jaradat M, Yoo JW, Makar R. A high-value cost conscious approach to minimize heparin induced thrombocytopenia antibody (HITAb) testing using the 4T score. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2016 Oct;42(3):441-6. doi: 10.1007/s11239-016-1396-6.
Bayat M, Macedo FY, Ansari AS, Bracey AW, Akinyele S, Salazar M. Evaluation of clinical and laboratory data for early diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2015 Oct 1;72(19):1649-55. doi: 10.2146/ajhp140778.
Andreescu AC, Possidente C, Hsieh M, Cushman M. Evaluation of a pharmacy-based surveillance program for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Pharmacotherapy. 2000 Aug;20(8):974-80. doi: 10.1592/phco.20.11.974.35264.
Smythe MA, Mehta TP, Koerber JM, Forsyth LL, Sykes E, Corbets LR, Melendy SM, Parikh R. Development and implementation of a comprehensive heparin-induced thrombocytopenia recognition and management protocol. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2012 Feb 1;69(3):241-8. doi: 10.2146/ajhp110313.
Burnett AE, Bowles H, Borrego ME, Montoya TN, Garcia DA, Mahan C. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: reducing misdiagnosis via collaboration between an inpatient anticoagulation pharmacy service and hospital reference laboratory. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2016 Nov;42(4):471-8. doi: 10.1007/s11239-016-1381-0.
Floresca D, Dupree L, Basile S, Tan P. Evaluation of appropriate serologic testing for suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2012 Sep 15;69(18):1581-7. doi: 10.2146/ajhp110513.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
16092401-IRB01
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id