Comparing transfusion practice at multiple hospitals using electronically collected and analysed data.

BACKGROUND: Comparisons of transfusion practice between organisations are time-consuming using manual methods for data collection. We performed a feasibility study to determine whether large-scale transfusion data from three English hospitals could be combined to allow comparisons of transfusion practice. METHODS: Clinical, laboratory and transfusion data from patients discharged between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017 were extracted from Patient Administration Systems (PAS), Laboratory Information Management Systems (LIMS), and electronic transfusion systems at three NHS hospitals, which are academic medical centres based in large cities outside London. A centralised database and business intelligence software were used to compare the data. RESULTS: The dataset contained 748 982 episodes of patient care with 91 410 blood components transfused. The study confirms the results of previous studies finding peaks in the ages of transfusion in the 0-4 years age range, in women of childbearing ages, and in males over 60 years. The number of components transfused per 1000 bed days was used as a standardised comparator. Red cell utilisation was 42.4, 40.4 and 49.5 units/1000 bed days and platelet utilisation 11.69, 7.76, and 11.66 units/1000 bed days. 60.5% (6848/11 310) of Group O D negative red cell units were transfused to non-group O D negative recipients. An analysis of component usage highlighted variations in practice, for example platelet usage for cardiac surgery varied from 2.4% to 7.3% across the three hospitals. CONCLUSION: This feasibility study demonstrates that large electronic datasets from hospitals can be combined to identify areas for targeted interventions to improve transfusion practice.

Programmes for the management of preoperative anaemia: audit in ten European hospitals within the PaBloE (Patient Blood Management in Europe) Working Group.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Preoperative anaemia is an independent risk factor for a higher morbidity and mortality, a longer hospitalization and increased perioperative transfusion rates. Managing preoperative anaemia is the first of three pillars of Patient Blood Management (PBM), a multidisciplinary concept to improve patient safety. While various studies provide medical information on (successful) anaemia treatment pathways, knowledge of organizational details of diagnosis and management of preoperative anaemia across Europe is scarce. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To gain information on various aspects of preoperative anaemia management including organization, financing, diagnostics and treatment, we conducted a survey (74 questions) in ten hospitals from seven European nations within the PaBloE (Patient Blood Management in Europe) working group covering the year 2016. RESULTS: Organization and activity in the field of preoperative anaemia management were heterogeneous in the participating hospitals. Almost all hospitals had pathways for managing preoperative anaemia in place, however, only two nations had national guidelines. In six of the ten participating hospitals, preoperative anaemia management was organized by anaesthetists. Diagnostics and treatment focused on iron deficiency anaemia which, in most hospitals, was corrected with intravenous iron. CONCLUSION: Implementation and approaches of preoperative anaemia management vary across Europe with a primary focus on treating iron deficiency anaemia. Findings of this survey motivated the hospitals involved to critically evaluate their practice and may also help other hospitals interested in PBM to develop action plans for diagnosis and management of preoperative anaemia.

Where do all the red blood cells (RBCs) go? Results of a survey of RBC use in England and North Wales in 2014.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of blood utilization can assist clinicians in directing patient blood management (PBM) initiatives and can facilitate demand planning by blood services. We describe a national study of red blood cell (RBC) utilization in England and North Wales in 2014. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: All hospitals that are supplied with blood components by NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) were asked to provide data on the age and sex of all recipients of transfusions of RBCs, and the clinical indication for every unit transfused, for two separate weeks in 2014. Clinical indication categories were derived from those used in previous studies in an English region. Completeness of data collection was checked against NHSBT issue and wastage data. RESULTS: Data on 46,111 RBC units were collected, representing 73% of all RBCs issued by NHSBT during the weeks surveyed. A total of 67% of RBC units were transfused for a medical indication, with 27 and 6% being transfused for surgical and obstetric/gynecologic indications, respectively. For comparison, figures from a study in the North of England in 2009, on which this national study was based, showed that 64% of RBCs were transfused to medical patients. All but 20 units could be ascribed to a broad clinical heading, for example, "gastrointestinal bleeding." CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the previous regional finding that the percentage of RBC units that are transfused to surgical patients in England and North Wales is now much lower than for medical patients and suggest that PBM initiatives should now focus on medical patients.

A randomized noninferiority crossover trial of corrected count increments and bleeding in thrombocytopenic hematology patients receiving 2- to 5- versus 6- or 7-day-stored platelets.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial screening offers the possibility of extending platelet (PLT) storage to Day 7. We conducted a noninferiority, crossover trial comparing PLTs stored for 6 or 7 days versus 2 to 5 days. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Stable hematology patients were allocated to receive blocks of 2- to 5- and 6- or 7-day PLTs in random order. The primary outcome was the proportion of successful transfusions during the first block, defined as a corrected count increment (CCI) of more than 4.5 at 8 to 24 hours posttransfusion. RESULTS: Of 122 patients with an evaluable first block, 87 (71%) and 84 (69%) had successful transfusions after 2- to 5- and 6- or 7-day PLTs of mean (SD) ages of 3.8 (1.0) and 6.4 (0.5) days, respectively. Six- or 7-day PLTs were declared noninferior to 2- to 5-day PLTs since the upper confidence interval (CI) limit was less than the predefined noninferiority margin of 10% (95% CI, -14.0% to 9.1%; p = 0.766). Logistic regression analysis gave an adjusted odds ratio of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.47-1.58; p = 0.625). Mean (SD) 8- to 24-hour CCIs were 9.4 (7.9) and 7.7 (7.1) after transfusion with 2- to 5- or 6- or 7-day PLTs (95% CI, -3.31 to 0.03; p = 0.054). The proportions of days with bleeding scores of WHO Grade 2 or higher were 13% (38/297 days) and 11% (32/296 days; 95% CI, -3.2 to 7.2; p = 0.454). Median interval to next PLT transfusion (2 days) was unaffected (95% CI, -10.5 to 5.4; p = 0.531). CONCLUSION: In hematology patients, there was no evidence that 6- or 7-day PLTs were inferior to 2- to 5-day PLTs, as measured by proportion of patients with successful transfusions, bleeding events, or interval to next transfusion.

Assessing transfusion competency in junior doctors: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is scope to further improve the safety of transfusion practice within the United Kingdom. This study aims to identify the current role of junior doctors in the transfusion process and to assess their competency to appropriately prescribe blood and blood products to patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Transfusion competency in junior doctors training in a single region was addressed through anonymized questionnaires assessing factual knowledge, personal reflection, and documented evidence of competency. Factual knowledge comprised 33 true-false questions (competency score) covering indications for transfusion, special requirements, risks of transfusion, and guidelines for testing in transfusion. Background data on current practice and education in transfusion medicine were addressed using multiple-choice and single-response questions. RESULTS: A total of 787 newly qualified doctors, comprising 79% of first-year (F1) and 62% of second-year (F2) Foundation doctors, completed the assessment over a 3-week period. There was no improvement in competency score between F1 and F2 doctors (p = 0.1). Competency scores correlated most strongly with undergraduate education in transfusion medicine and attendance at hospital induction (p < 0.01). Junior doctors had a high confidence level with regard to prescribing blood, although only 78% were aware they had been competency assessed against national standards. CONCLUSION: Junior doctors are involved in sampling, prescribing, consenting, and documenting transfusion practice frequently enough to maintain competency. They are rarely involved in the collection, bedside checking, or administration of blood despite current curriculum requirements. There is scope to significantly improve both the training and the assessment of transfusion competency in doctors.

Can Team-Based Learning (TBL) Be Used to Deliver Postgraduate Education in Transfusion Medicine for UK Physicians?

BACKGROUND: There is global need for evidence-based methodologies to effectively deliver transfusion training. This research critically assesses both efficacy and the practicalities of introducing team-based learning (TBL) to deliver transfusion medicine education to UK postgraduate doctors (residency equivalence). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: One TBL orientation session and three transfusion medicine sessions, mapped to the 2012 Foundation Programme curriculum, were designed adhering to TBL principles. These were delivered by one tutor during 'compulsory' (except rota commitments and leave) educational sessions. Team continuity plus trainee reaction, knowledge acquisition and behaviour were evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-eight doctors received a mean 2.5 TBL sessions. Five teams were developed with average team membership of 5.85 doctors per session. Overall team continuity (total team members attending/potential team members × 100) was 65% over the four sessions. Qualitative and quantitative trainee reaction to TBL was positive. Objective knowledge acquisition showed improved team knowledge over individual knowledge. Mean team readiness assurance testing (RAT) score exceeded maximum individual RAT score in 90% of cases. Subjective knowledge acquisition significantly improved, although confidence concerning prescribing declined. The reported time spent preparing for sessions correlated with enjoyment, subjective knowledge gain and clinical confidence. Preparation time was reported as 'adequate' or 'excellent' in 86% of anonymous feedback. CONCLUSION: TBL is an enjoyable and effective approach to deliver transfusion education to doctors, particularly when preparation is adequate. Team continuity is poor despite 'compulsory' education sessions. This must be considered when designing and delivering TBL sessions in the UK postgraduate medical setting.

Patient blood management: an update of current guidance in clinical practice.

Patient blood management is a global, evidence-based, multidisciplinary initiative to reduce unnecessary blood transfusion while optimizing other available techniques. This article summarizes current patient blood management strategies and highlights future developments in UK practice.