Presence of medication taken by blood donors in plasma for transfusion.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The TRIP national hemovigilance and biovigilance office receives reports on side-effects and incidents associated with transfusion of labile blood products. Anaphylactic reactions accounted for the largest number of serious transfusion reactions in the period 2008-2012. In most cases, no cause is found for these reactions. TRIP data show that anaphylactic reactions occur relatively frequently with transfusion of plasma or platelet concentrates. Data from blood services show that 10% or more of plasma donors regularly use medication which is permitted under donation guidelines. It is conceivable that medication taken by the donor in plasma for transfusion could cause an anaphylactic transfusion reaction in the recipient. This exploratory study investigated the presence of drugs or drug metabolites in donor plasma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Samples (5 ml) were taken from thawed, quarantine fresh frozen plasma units (FFP) which had to be rejected for transfusion because of leaks or length of time after thawing. The samples were analysed for approximately 1000 drugs and drug metabolites using a toxicological screening method. RESULTS: Eighty-seven samples were analysed. Toxicological screening was positive in fourteen samples (16%). In eleven samples, one substance was found, and in three samples, the presence of two or three drugs was detected. CONCLUSION: After freezing, storage and thawing of fresh FFP, it is possible to detect medication taken by the donor. Further investigation is recommended to analyse whether donors' medication in plasma can be implicated in some cases of allergic or anaphylactic reactions in transfusion recipients.

Quality indicators for the hospital transfusion chain: a national survey conducted in 100 dutch hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The 2011 Dutch Blood Transfusion Guideline for hospitals incorporates seven internal quality indicators for evaluation of the hospital transfusion chain. The indicators aim to measure guideline compliance as shown by the instatement of a hospital transfusion committee and transfusion safety officer (structural indicators), observance of transfusion triggers and mandatory traceability of labile blood components (process indicators). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Two voluntary online surveys were sent to all Dutch hospitals for operational years 2011 and 2012 to assess compliance with the guideline recommendations. RESULTS: Most hospitals had a hospital transfusion committee and had appointed a transfusion safety officer (TSO). In 2012, only 23% of hospitals complied with the recommended minimum of four annual transfusion committee meetings and 8 h/week for the TSO. Compliance with the recommended pretransfusion haemoglobin threshold for RBC transfusion was achieved by 90% of hospitals in over 80% of transfusions; 58% of hospitals measured the pretransfusion platelet count in over 80% of platelet transfusions and 87% of hospitals complied with the legally mandatory traceability of blood components in over 95% of transfusions. CONCLUSION: With the current blood transfusion indicators, it is feasible to monitor aspects of the quality of the hospital transfusion chain and blood transfusion practice and to assess guideline compliance. The results from this study suggest that there are opportunities for significant improvement in blood transfusion practice in the Netherlands. These indicators could potentially be used for national and international benchmarking of blood transfusion practice.

Variation between hospitals in rates of reported transfusion reactions: is a high reporting rate an indicator of safer transfusion?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It has been suggested that the rate of reported transfusion reactions is positively correlated with safety of the transfusion chain in a hospital. We evaluated this assumption in the Transfusion Reactions in Patients Dutch National Hemovigilance Office database taking reported incorrect blood component transfused as a proxy for unsafe transfusion. METHODS: Reports from 2006 to 2010 and annual numbers of transfused blood components from the 103 hospitals were analysed. The rate of transfusion reactions per 1000 blood components was calculated per hospital. Logistic regression analysis was performed between reporting of at least one incorrect blood component and tertile of transfusion reaction rate. RESULTS: Out of the 103 hospitals, 101 had complete data in some and 93 in all 5years. In all, 72 had reported at least one incorrect blood component transfused; this was associated with blood use level and also with rate of reported transfusion reactions: odds ratio 4·2 (95% confidence interval, 1·3-13·7) in the highest vs. the lowest tertile after adjustment for blood use level. CONCLUSION: Hospitals in the Netherlands which report more transfusion reactions per 1000 units are also more likely to have reported incorrect blood component transfused. The data do not support that hospitals with a higher rate of transfusion reaction reports are safer.