Patient acceptance of a foot pump device used for thromboprophylaxis.

Our study aimed to find out patients' opinion on a foot pump device used for thromboprophylaxis, as compared to subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin injections. A survey of 43 consecutive patients undergoing hip and knee joint replacement was carried out at our hospital. Patients were assessed for pain and a questionnaire was used to gauge patients' attitudes towards the two thromboprophylactic measures. There was no statistically significant difference in the level of discomfort as assessed on the visual analogue score, between two methods. An equal percentage of patients (74.4%) disagreed that either the foot pump or injection was painful (p = 1). Though a larger percentage of patients (footpumps: 44.2%, injections: 27.9%; p = 0.12) would rather not use the foot pump, still 69.8% would be willing to keep on using these foot pumps at home for 4 weeks after discharge from the hospital. Eighty one percent were agreeable to foot pump use if they have another joint replacement later. Overall, the foot pump was at least as well tolerated as subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin in the group studied. Its use as post discharge prophylaxis is also acceptable to the majority of our patients.