Evaluation of donor factors contributing to plateletpheresis yields among apheresis platelet donors.

BACKGROUND: The University of California, Irvine Blood Donor Center operates a plateletpheresis donor program utilizing the Amicus Cell Separator. Plateletpheresis donors may donate one or more apheresis platelet (PLT) units per collection event. This study seeks to characterize UC Irvine's donor pool by identifying biometric and demographic attributes predictive of double product (DP) collections. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Biometric, demographic and procedural data from 1,786 apheresis donors were collected and entered into Excel spreadsheets. Of the 1,786 successful plateletpheresis procedures performed from January 2009 to April 2012, 1,442 of the donations were performed using double-needle (DN) kits. Only data from DN-kit collections were used for statistical analyses. The Classification And Regression Tree (CART) algorithm was used to help identify variables predictive of donating multiple PLT units in a single collection event. RESULTS: Donors weighing 75.7 kg or greater appear to be twice as likely to donate DPs as those weighing less than 75.7 kg. For donors weighing less than 75.7 kg, females appear to be twice as likely to donate DPs as males. Donors exhibiting platelet counts of 216.5 K/mcL or greater appear to be twice as likely to donate DPs as those with platelet counts fewer than 216.5 K/mcL. CONCLUSION: Weight, sex, and PLT count were identified as the most predictive donor attributes that separate UCI donors into DP donors and non-DP donors. Greater weights, greater PLT counts, and female sex confer to greater PLT yields per given amount of time.

Does Extended Reality Simulation Improve Surgical/Procedural Learning and Patient Outcomes When Compared With Standard Training Methods?: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: The use of extended reality (XR) technologies, including virtual, augmented, and mixed reality, has increased within surgical and procedural training programs. Few studies have assessed experiential learning- and patient-based outcomes using XR compared with standard training methods. METHODS: As a working group for the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, we used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and a PICO strategy to perform a systematic review of 4238 articles to assess the effectiveness of XR technologies compared with standard training methods. Outcomes were grouped into knowledge, time-to-completion, technical proficiency, reactions, and patient outcomes. Because of study heterogeneity, a meta-analysis was not feasible. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies met eligibility criteria: 18 randomized controlled trials, 7 comparative studies, and 7 systematic reviews. Outcomes of most studies included Kirkpatrick levels of evidence I-III (reactions, knowledge, and behavior), while few reported level IV outcomes (patient). The overall risk of bias was low. With few exceptions, included studies showed XR technology to be more effective than standard training methods in improving objective skills and performance, shortening procedure time, and receiving more positive learner ratings. However, XR use did not show significant differences in gained knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical or procedural XR training may improve technical skill development among trainees and is generally favored over standard training methods. However, there should be an additional focus on how skill development translates to clinically relevant outcomes. We recommend longitudinal studies to examine retention and transfer of training to clinical settings, methods to improve timely, adaptive feedback for deliberate practice, and cost analyses.

Project IMPACT Pilot Report: Feasibility of Implementing a Hospital-to-Home Transition Bundle.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To improve hospital to home transitions, a 4-element pediatric patient-centered transition bundle was developed, including: a transition readiness checklist; predischarge teach-back education; timely and complete written handoff to the primary care provider; and a postdischarge phone call. The objective of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of bundle implementation and report initial outcomes at 4 pilot sites. Outcome measures included postdischarge caregiver ability to teach-back key home management information and 30-day reuse rates. METHODS: A multisite, observational time series using multiple planned sequential interventions to implement bundle components with non-technology-supported and technology-supported patients. Data were collected via electronic health record reviews and during postdischarge phone calls. Statistical process control charts were used to assess outcomes. RESULTS: Four pilot sites implemented the bundle between January 2014 and May 2015 for 2601 patients, of whom 1394 had postdischarge telephone encounters. Improvement was noted in the implementation of all bundle elements with the transitions readiness checklist posing the greatest feasibility challenge. Phone contact connection rates were 69%. Caregiver ability to teach-back essential home management information postdischarge improved from 18% to 82%. No improvement was noted in reuse rates, which differed dramatically between technology-supported and non-technology-supported patients. CONCLUSIONS: A pediatric care transition bundle was successfully tested and implemented, as demonstrated by improvement in all process measures, as well as caregiver home management skills. Important considerations for successful implementation and evaluation of the discharge bundle include the role of local context, electronic health record integration, and subgroup analysis for technology-supported patients.