Although other studies have shown improvements in VTE prophylaxis with chart reminders, this study adds to our understanding in a few meaningful ways. First, the authors have shown a sustained response over a longer period than those of previous studies. They confirm the importance of a multifaceted, active intervention in that the educational component appeared to be integral to this sustainment. Rates remained higher in the surgical units, where staff turnover is much lower than in the medical units. They were able to conduct the study using a low-cost, low-tech approach, making the study more applicable to institutions that may not have electronic medical records. More importantly, this is one of the few studies in the literature that has reported on the incidence of symptomatic VTE in addition to the prophylaxis patterns. Although the number of documented events was not reduced, there is a suggestion that their strategy led to a reduction in potentially preventable VTE, which is defined as a hospital-acquired VTE that develops in a patient not receiving prophylaxis. The assumption is that if patients receive the evidence-based recommended prophylaxis and still develop a VTE, the event may not have been preventable. Of the patients who developed thrombosis in the postintervention group, only 6% had not received any form of prophylaxis and, thus, might have been preventable. On the other hand, 40% of the patients in the preintervention group who developed thrombosis were not receiving prophylaxis. These events were potentially preventable. Finally, this is also one of only a few studies that have examined the rates of thrombocytopenia and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, in addition to the rates of bleeding.