Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY PHARMACY PRACTICE, cilt.28, sa.7, ss.1560-1567, 2022 (SCI-Expanded)
Introduction Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism creates a big burden on both patients and healthcare systems. Clinical guidelines have a consensus on the initiation of prophylactic treatment for hospitalised patients, however a debate still exists for ambulatory cancer patients. Therefore, this study aimed to identify attitudes and practices of medical oncologists on cancer-associated venous thromboembolism management. Methods An online survey consisting of 22 questions was developed by researchers in the view of previous studies and delivered to 100 medical oncologists registered to the national society of medical oncology by e-mail between September and October 2018. Descriptive and statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 23.0 (ICM Corp. Released 2015. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). Results A total of 62 medical oncologists (75.8% male) responded to the survey (response rate of 62%). The most critical three risk factors considered for initiating prophylaxis were prior venous thromboembolism history, immobilisation and tumour/cancer type for inpatients and outpatients (chi(2) test, p < 0.001). The first choice of drug for prophylaxis was mostly low molecular weight heparins (n = 60, 96.8%). In the absence of contraindications, physicians initiate prophylaxis 'usually' for inpatients (n = 25, 40.3%) and outpatients (n = 5, 8.1%). However routine use of the Khorana score is not incorporated into the risk assessment process of cancer patients. Conclusion Attitudes of oncologists towards thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients are consistent with previous studies in the literature. The respondents are aware of the venous thromboembolism risk of cancer patients, however raising awareness on both cancer-associated venous thromboembolism and current guideline recommendations is needed.