Examining Injustices: Transfusion Medicine and Race.

Race and ethnicity are sociopolitical and not biological constructs, and assertions that these population descriptors have scientific meaning has caused significant harm. A critical assessment of the transfusion medicine literature is an important aspect of promoting race-conscious as opposed to race-based medicine. Utilizing current definitions and health equity frameworks, this review will provide a critical appraisal of transfusion medicine studies at the intersection of race and healthcare disparities, with a focus on larger methodological challenges facing the transfusion medicine community. Moving forward, risk modelling accounting for upstream factors, patient input, as well as an expert consensus on how to critically conduct and evaluate this type of literature are needed. Further, when using race and ethnicity in research contexts, investigators must be aware of existing guidelines for such reporting.

Current advances in 2022: A critical review of selected topics by the Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies (AABB) Clinical Transfusion Medicine Committee.

BACKGROUND: The Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies Clinical Transfusion Medicine Committee (CTMC) composes a summary of new and important advances in transfusion medicine (TM) on an annual basis. Since 2018, this has been assembled into a manuscript and published in Transfusion. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: CTMC members selected original manuscripts relevant to TM that were published electronically and/or in print during calendar year 2022. Papers were selected based on perceived importance and/or originality. References for selected papers were made available to CTMC members to provide feedback. Members were also encouraged to identify papers that may have been omitted initially. They then worked in groups of two to three to write a summary for each new publication within their broader topic. Each topic summary was then reviewed and edited by two separate committee members. The final manuscript was assembled by the first and senior authors. While this review is extensive, it is not a systematic review and some publications considered important by readers may have been excluded. RESULTS: For calendar year 2022, summaries of key publications were assembled for the following broader topics within TM: blood component therapy; infectious diseases, blood donor testing, and collections; patient blood management; immunohematology and genomics; hemostasis; hemoglobinopathies; apheresis and cell therapy; pediatrics; and health care disparities, diversity, equity, and inclusion. DISCUSSION: This Committee Report reviews and summarizes important publications and advances in TM published during calendar year 2022, and maybe a useful educational tool.

An international genomics health workforce education priorities assessment.

Aim: Global implementation of genomic medicine will require education of healthcare providers. There are limited international needs assessment data to guide curriculum development. Materials & methods: Genomics education experts developed and distributed a survey to individuals with knowledge of country-specific needs: 113 completed surveys (19% response rate) from 34 countries. A high percentage of respondents ranked non genetics physicians as the #1 target for genetics education. Over 70% indicated a need for moderate/extensive modification in physician training. The majority considered germline and somatic topics and targeting primary care and specialist providers equally important. Conclusion: Regardless of country economic level, there is a clear need for genomics education of healthcare providers. The study results can be used to focus future genomic medicine education efforts.

Pediatric resident knowledge of transfusion medicine: Results from the BEST-TEST3 international education needs assessment.

BACKGROUND: Transfusions are a common intervention within pediatrics and require unique considerations to optimize patient care. Poor knowledge of evidence-based transfusion practice can lead to misuse of transfusion therapy and harm. While there have been assessments of transfusion medicine knowledge of physicians caring for adult patients, there is little data regarding pediatricians. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using a published transfusion medicine knowledge exam for internal medicine physicians as a backbone, pediatric transfusion medicine experts, using an iterative process, developed a pediatric-specific examination. Pilot testing and Rasch analysis, a method used in high-stakes testing, was used to validate the exam. The exam and a previously validated survey on transfusion medicine training, attitudes, and perceived ability were administered to pediatric residents. Analysis consisted of descriptive statistics as well as comparisons of exam scores based on survey responses. RESULTS: 330 pediatric residents from 19 sites in 6 countries participated in the study. The vast majority (91%) of residents had obtained blood product consent. The mean exam score was 37.1% (range 9.5%-71.4%) with no statistical differences based on amount or perceived quality of transfusion medicine education or perceived ability. DISCUSSION: A rigorously validated exam has now been developed that can be used to assess pediatric transfusion medicine knowledge. A large international group of pediatric residents performed poorly on the exam demonstrating a pressing need for improved transfusion medicine education to ensure safe and appropriate administration of blood components to infants and children.

The National Cancer Institute R25 Cancer Education Grants Program: A Workshop Report.

Through the R25 Cancer Education Grants Program (CEGP), the National Cancer Institute (NCI) has been supporting the broad educational needs of the cancer research and cancer healthcare communities since 1974. NCI sponsored a workshop on September 13, 2016 in Bethesda, Maryland, with the objectives of sharing best practices in cancer education, communicating R25 CEGP programmatic information, and gathering ideas to strengthen the R25 CEGP to better meet the emerging needs in cancer education in the face of a rapidly changing landscape in cancer research and cancer care. With 53 leaders in cancer education in attendance, the workshop featured an overview of the R25 CEGP by NCI Program Staff, a showcase of several types of CEGP programs by current R25 grantees, and in-depth discussions on a broad range of questions critical for the continued success of the R25 CEGP. The workshop afforded an opportunity, for the first time, for cancer researchers and clinicians conducting different forms of cancer education activities to gather in one place as leaders of a community of increasing importance. The discussion resulted in a set of suggestions that will benefit the R25 CEGP and cancer education in general. There was a general consensus among the participants that bringing the cancer education community together is a significant achievement of the workshop that will have a long-lasting impact on cancer education.

BEST-TEST2: assessment of hematology trainee knowledge of transfusion medicine.

BACKGROUND: As transfusion is a common therapy and key component in every hematologist's practice, hematology training programs should dedicate significant time and effort to delivering high-quality transfusion medicine education to their trainees. The current state of hematology trainee knowledge of transfusion medicine is not known. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A validated assessment tool developed by the Biomedical Excellence for Safer Transfusion (BEST) Collaborative was used to assess prior transfusion medicine education, attitudes, perceived ability, and transfusion medicine knowledge of hematology trainees. RESULTS: A total of 149 hematology trainees at 17 international sites were assessed. The overall mean exam score was 61.6% (standard deviation, 13.4%; range, 30%-100%) with no correlation in exam scores with postgraduate year or previous transfusion medicine education in medical school or internal medicine residency. However, better scores correlated with 3 or more hours of transfusion medicine education (p = 0.0003) and perceived higher-quality education during hematology training (p = 0.03). Hematology trainees at US sites, where hematology is often combined with oncology training, had statistically lower scores than trainees at non-US sites (56.2% vs. 67.4%; p < 0.0001). In terms of topic areas, although 93% of participants had obtained consent for transfusion, the lowest scores were on transfusion reaction-related questions. CONCLUSION: Given the overall poor performance, this study serves as an impetus for all hematology training programs to reevaluate the quality and quantity of transfusion medicine training and can assist in the development of targeted curricula.

Internal medicine resident knowledge of transfusion medicine: results from the BEST-TEST international education needs assessment.

BACKGROUND: Blood transfusion is the most common hospital procedure performed in the United States. While inadequate physician transfusion medicine knowledge may lead to inappropriate practice, such an educational deficit has not been investigated on an international scale using a validated assessment tool. Identifying specific deficiencies is critical for developing curricula to improve patient care. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Rasch analysis, a method used in high-stakes testing, was used to validate an assessment tool consisting of a 23-question survey and a 20-question examination. The assessment tool was administered to internal medicine residents to determine prior training, attitudes, perceived ability, and actual knowledge related to transfusion medicine. RESULTS: A total of 474 residents at 23 programs in nine countries completed the examination. The overall mean score of correct responses was 45.7% (site range, 32%-56%). The mean score for Postgraduate Year (PGY)1 (43.9%) was significantly lower than for PGY3 (47.1%) and PGY4 (50.6%) residents. Although 89% of residents had participated in obtaining informed consent from a patient for transfusion, residents scored poorly (<25% correct) on questions related to transfusion reactions. The majority of residents (65%) would find additional transfusion medicine training "very" or "extremely" helpful. CONCLUSION: Internationally, internal medicine residents have poor transfusion medicine knowledge and would welcome additional training. The especially limited knowledge of transfusion reactions suggests an initial area for focused training. This study not only represents the largest international assessment of transfusion medicine knowledge, but also serves as a model for rigorous, collaborative research in medical education.

Implementation and assessment of a resident curriculum in evidence-based transfusion medicine.

CONTEXT: Given the number of controversial issues in transfusion medicine, an understanding of biostatistics and evidence-based medicine is invaluable. No detailed curricula that address teaching critical appraisal of the transfusion medicine literature have been published or evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To design, implement, and evaluate an evidence-based transfusion medicine curriculum. DESIGN: Four hour-long training sessions in journal club format were designed for a 2-month transfusion medicine rotation for clinical pathology residents. A previously validated survey was administered precurriculum and postcurriculum to gauge changes in resident self-reported attitudes and confidence regarding biostatistics methods and critical appraisal of the medical literature. Residents were also asked to evaluate the course regarding content, execution, and utility. RESULTS: Seven second-year residents participated in the sessions. Following the curriculum there were statistically significant increases in the residents' self-reported ability to appraise critically and search the medical literature (P = .05). Resident confidence interpreting an article's statistical results also significantly improved (P = .01). There was also a significant change in the residents' desire to learn more about statistics (P = .02). Resident reviews of the curriculum were overall extremely positive. CONCLUSION: A 4-session curriculum can have a significant effect on resident self-reported ability to appraise critically and understand the medical literature and help foster interest in biostatistics. Although based on small numbers, this study represents one of the first efforts to evaluate the efficacy of a transfusion medicine curriculum and can potentially serve as a starting point to better integrate and evaluate knowledge of evidence-based transfusion medicine during residency training.

A systematic assessment of the quality of reporting for platelet transfusion studies.

BACKGROUND: As evidence-based medicine assumes increasing importance, there is a need for high-quality reporting of clinical studies. A recent review of clinical platelet (PLT) studies indicated variability in reporting. We undertook a critical analysis of PLT transfusion studies to determine the quality of reporting. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A systematic MEDLINE search for clinical studies of PLT transfusion was performed to identify articles. Relevant observational studies (OBS) were critiqued using the STROBE checklist and randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) using the CONSORT checklist. Studies were further evaluated with a PLT-specific checklist developed by the authors. Observations were analyzed descriptively and using Pareto analysis. RESULTS: A total of 772 articles were identified by the search. Eighty-six articles (23 RCTs and 63 OBS) met eligibility criteria. All RCTs, and a similar number of OBS (24), were randomly selected for analysis. Studies reported the scientific background and rationale, key results, and outcomes. OBS frequently did not consider bias and confounders. RCTs frequently did not explain bias, interim analyses, stopping rules, success of blinding, or weaknesses of multiple analyses. The PLT-specific critique found many studies adequately reported basics of the PLT product, PLT increment, and transfusion reactions. Studies frequently failed to report specific details of PLT compatibility, details of product preparation, and use of other blood products. CONCLUSION: Recently published articles of clinical PLT transfusion share common strengths and weaknesses. The quality of reporting may be improved by providing guidelines to authors and journal editors that list the essential elements of a well-reported clinical study of PLT transfusion.

Strict adherence to a blood bank specimen labeling policy by all clinical laboratories significantly reduces the incidence of "wrong blood in tube".

Phlebotomy errors leading to incompatible transfusions are a leading cause of transfusion-related morbidity and mortality. Our institution's specimen-labeling policy requires the collection date, 2 unique patient identifiers, and the ability to identify the phlebotomist. This policy, however, was initially strictly enforced only by the blood bank. In fiscal year 2005, following an educational campaign on proper specimen labeling, all clinical laboratories began strictly adhering to the specimen-labeling policy. Compared with the preceding 4 years, in the 3 years following policy implementation, the incidence of wrong blood in tube (WBIT) and mislabeled specimens detected by the blood bank decreased by 73.5% (0.034% to 0.009%; P < or = .0001) and by 84.6% (0.026% to 0.004%; P < or = .0001), respectively. During a short period, a simple, low-cost educational initiative and policy change can lead to statistically significant decreases in WBIT and mislabeled specimens received by the blood bank.

Evidence-based guidelines--an introduction.

Recommendations in the form of clinical practice guidelines are increasingly common. Clinical guidelines are systematically developed statements designed to help administrators, practitioners and patients make decisions about appropriate health care for specific circumstances. In North America, guidelines developed by professional societies, government panels and cooperative groups are frequently used to measure quality, to allocate resources and to determine how health care dollars are spent. For clinicians, guidelines provide a summary of the relevant medical literature and offer assistance in deciding which diagnostic tests to order, which treatments to use for specific conditions, when to discharge patients from the hospital, and many other aspects of clinical practice.