SRS171 - UK clinician perspectives on venous thromboembolism guidelines and risk assessment tools

Abstract Background Hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a leading yet preventable cause of mortality. Based on National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendations, all hospitalised patients should have a VTE risk assessment. This study examined factors impacting UK clinician engagement with the NICE VTE Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) and VTE risk assessment tools (VTE-RATs). Methods The adapted-validated Clinician Guideline Determinants Questionnaire (CGDQ) was disseminated through clinical and trainee networks. Results Among the 100 respondents, most were doctors (78%), followed by nurses (15%) and other healthcare professionals (7%). 89% reported routinely completing VTE risk assessments, predominantly using bespoke Trust RATs (62%). Clinicians valued VTE-RATs for patient safety; two-thirds of respondents rated them as highly important. However, only 57% found them highly influential for thromboprophylaxis decisions. Enablers to using RATs were electronic integration, ease of use, and compulsory completion. Time pressures, lack of integration with patient records, and lack of clarity for complex cases were common barriers to RAT usage. Regarding perceptions of guidelines, most respondents (84%) felt guidelines optimise healthcare delivery and outcomes. Engagement with the NICE VTE CPGs was varied: 47% had read it frequently, 36% had once, and 14% were aware of it but hadn’t read it. Conclusions Despite widespread VTE-RAT usage, engagement with NICE VTE CPGs remained limited. The perception of VTE-RATs as important for patient safety but less so for guiding thromboprophylaxis decisions highlights a gap between clinical practice and guideline awareness. Better integration and standardisation of VTE-RATs may help align clinician practice with national guidelines.