Background: VTE is a serious complication in multiple myeloma patients, who have a 9-fold increased risk compared to the general population. Prophylaxis for VTE is recommended by international guidelines in multiple myeloma patients based on VTE risk assessment, but published studies have demonstrated prescribing may be suboptimal. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of integrating standardized VTE prophylaxis orders for multiple myeloma patients on active treatment into our EHR, which services over 2300 providers within 500 community cancer treatment locations across the United States. Methods: National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guideline-recommended VTE prophylaxis agents were integrated as optional orders into multiple myeloma EHR regimen templates from June to July 2022. Optional informational orders were also included: a “VTE Prophylaxis Reminder” order served as a trigger for the care team if prophylaxis was not prescribed and a “VTE Prophylaxis Exception” order served as documentation if the patient did not qualify for anticoagulation. An educational guide about VTE risk stratification and prophylaxis in multiple myeloma was developed and embedded in regimen templates. To evaluate the impact of this intervention, a structured EHR data export was used to identify multiple myeloma patients with regimen templates ordered during the prespecified time frames. A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify documentation of anticoagulation or reason for exception on or prior to cycle 1 day 1 of the multiple myeloma regimen. Data were compared using the Fisher’s exact test. We also evaluated ordering of VTE prophylaxis and use of informational orders from regimens during the post-implementation phase. Results: A total of 297 patients were identified, with 128 during the pre-implementation phase (May 2022) and 169 during the post-implementation phase (September 2022). Documentation of anticoagulation or reason for exception on or prior to cycle 1 day 1 of the multiple myeloma regimen increased from 70% (89/128) during the pre-implementation phase to 81% (137/169) during the post-implementation phase (two-sided p=0.0276). Aspirin was the most common agent prescribed in 73% and 64% of patients, respectively. During the post-implementation phase, VTE prophylaxis was prescribed directly from the regimen in 16% of patients. The “VTE Prophylaxis Reminder” order was utilized for 89% of patients and the “VTE Prophylaxis Exception” order was utilized for 1 patient. Conclusions: Integration of standardized orders into EHR regimen templates may facilitate prescribing and serve as reminders for the care team. We saw an 11% increase in documentation of VTE prophylaxis, which may potentially reduce risk of VTE in this patient population. Efforts are ongoing to highlight the need for anticoagulation and importance of documentation.