How do we use the National Healthcare Safety Network for Hemovigilance in Massachusetts?

BACKGROUND: Use of the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) has been essential to the success of the Massachusetts Hemovigilance Program and has allowed for the timely identification of signals and trends over a defined population that correlate with national and international hemovigilance (HV) data. Here, we outline how the NHSN system is used for monitoring HV data in Massachusetts and encourage adoption of NHSN for nationwide HV surveillance. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A collaboration that grew over time between local HV stakeholders and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) resulted in the change from a paper-based method of reporting adverse reactions and monthly transfusion activity for compliance with state requirements to replacement with statewide adoption of reporting via NHSN. RESULTS: Over 1.5 million blood products were transfused in Massachusetts between 2017 and 2021, with 3000 adverse reactions among 10 defined types reported. Using NHSN, MDPH has been able to produce numerous reports, publications, and presentations that have made previously non-obtainable HV and blood utilization data available. DISCUSSION: Although limitations to these self-reported data exist, such as lack of external validation, successful statewide implementation of NHSN for hospital blood bank reporting is possible and has benefits beyond those for regulatory oversight. It results in standardized, actionable data at both the hospital and state level, enabling inter-facility comparisons, benchmarking, and opportunities for practice improvement.

Clinical consequences of a 30-day interval between antibody identifications.

BACKGROUND: While studies have shown that antibody detection may be delayed if an antibody identification (ABID) is not performed every 3 days, little data exist on the potential major risk of an acute hemolytic transfusion reaction (aHTR). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: At our institution, if no change in the screen, or a positive crossmatch, ABIDs are performed every 30 days. Between January 1, 2015 and May 31, 2019, all new antibodies detected within 28 days of a prior transfusion were identified. Testing results and patient charts were reviewed for evidence of hemolysis. The $211 patient charge was used to determine the cost for ABIDs performed during the studied time period. RESULTS: For 36 patients, a new clinically significant alloantibody was detected within 28 days of an antigen-positive transfusion. Only one of these patients had a history of prior alloimmunization and put at possible risk due to the ABID policy. For this patient, while there was less than the expected increment to an antigen-positive unit, there was no clinical or laboratory evidence of an aHTR. During this same time, 6095 ABIDs were performed, at a cost of approximately $1.29 million, and 72,665 red cell transfusions occurred. CONCLUSION: With an ABID every 30 days, only one patient, over 4.5 years, was put at potential risk for hemolysis from one transfusion (0.001% of the total units transfused during the time period). While antibody detection may be delayed, performing ABIDs every 30 days saves money and medical laboratory scientist time and should be balanced against potential patient harm.

Hemovigilance in Massachusetts and the adoption of statewide hospital blood bank reporting using the National Healthcare Safety Network.

A collaboration that grew over time between local hemovigilance stakeholders and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) resulted in the change from a paper-based method of reporting adverse reactions and monthly transfusion activity for regulatory compliance purposes to statewide adoption of electronic reporting via the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). The NHSN is a web-based surveillance system that offers the capacity to capture transfusion-related adverse events, incidents, and monthly transfusion statistics from participating facilities. Massachusetts' hospital blood banks share the data they enter into NHSN with the MDPH to satisfy reporting requirements. Users of the NHSN Hemovigilance Module adhere to specified data entry guidelines, resulting in data that are comparable and standardized. Keys to successful statewide adoption of this reporting method include the fostering of strong partnerships with local hemovigilance champions and experts, engagement of regulatory and epidemiology divisions at the state health department, the leveraging of existing relationships with hospital NHSN administrators, and the existence of a regulatory deadline for implementation. Although limitations exist, successful implementation of statewide use of the NHSN Hemovigilance Module for hospital blood bank reporting is possible. The result is standardized, actionable data at both the hospital and state level that can facilitate interfacility comparisons, benchmarking, and opportunities for practice improvement.