Using Blood Wisely: lessons learnt in establishing a national implementation programme to reduce inappropriate red blood cell transfusion.

BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of blood is transfused inappropriately despite best evidence. In 2020, Choosing Wisely Canada launched a major national programme, 'Using Blood Wisely', the aim was to engage hospitals to audit their red blood cell transfusion use against national benchmarks and participate in a programme to decrease inappropriate use. STUDY DESIGN: Using Blood Wisely is a quality improvement programme including national benchmarks, an audit tool, recommended evidence-based effective interventions and a designation to reward success. Hospital engagement was measured using the number of hospitals signing up, performing a baseline audit, submitting the planning survey, entering two or more audits and achieving hospital designation. Barriers to implementation were collected. RESULTS: From 1 September 2020 to 31 December 2022, 229 individual hospitals signed up over time to participate. Their results are reported as 159 hospitals and hospital groups. Collectively, this accounts for 72% of the blood used in Canada. Overall, 147 (92%) performed a baseline audit, 10 (6%) submitted a planning survey and 130 (82%) entered two or more audits. At baseline (time of enrolment), 75 (51%) met both benchmarks. The designation was awarded to 62 (39%) hospital groups (a total of 105 individual hospitals) that met and sustained benchmarks. Barriers to implementation included human resource shortages, lack of local expertise to advise the team, need for more education of transfusion prescribers and competing priorities. CONCLUSION: In its initial phase, Using Blood Wisely engaged a substantial number of hospitals in transfusion quality improvement work and maintained that engagement. This large-scale engagement across a big country was more successful than anticipated. Additional efforts are needed to rigorously evaluate the programme's impact on utilisation.

Current state of technical transfusion medicine practice for out-of-hospital blood transfusion in Canada.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Canadian out-of-hospital blood transfusion programmes (OHBTPs) are emerging, to improve outcomes of trauma patients by providing pre-hospital transfusion from the scene of injury, given prolonged transport times. Literature is lacking to guide its implementation. Thus, we sought to gather technical transfusion medicine (TM)-specific practices across Canadian OHBTPs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was sent to TM representatives of Canadian OHBTPs from November 2021 to March 2022. Data regarding transport, packaging, blood components and inventory management were included and reported descriptively. Only practices involving Blood on Board programme components for emergency use were included. RESULTS: OHBTPs focus on helicopter emergency medical service programmes, with some supplying fixed-wing aircraft and ground ambulances. All provide 1-3 coolers with 2 units of O RhD/Kell-negative red blood cells (RBCs) per cooler, with British Columbia trialling coolers with 2 units of pre-thawed group A plasma. Inventory exchanges are scheduled and blood components are returned to TM inventory using visual inspection and internal temperature data logger readings. Coolers are validated to storage durations ranging from 72 to 124 h. All programmes audit to manage wastage, though there is no consensus on appropriate benchmarks. All programmes have a process for documenting units issued, reconciliation after transfusion and for transfusion reaction reporting; however, training programmes vary. Common considerations included storage during extreme temperature environments, O-negative RBC stewardship, recipient notification, traceability, clinical practice guidelines co-reviewed by TM and a common audit framework. CONCLUSION: OHBTPs have many similarities throughout Canada, where harmonization may assist in further developing standards, leveraging best practice and national coordination.

Guideline No. 431: Postpartum Hemorrhage and Hemorrhagic Shock.

OBJECTIVE: This guideline aims to provide evidence for prevention, recognition, and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage including severe hemorrhage leading to hemorrhagic shock. TARGET POPULATION: All pregnant patients. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Appropriate recognition and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage can prevent serious morbidity while reducing costs to the health care system by minimizing more costly interventions and length of hospital stays. EVIDENCE: Medical literature, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Database, and grey literature were searched for articles, published between 2012 and 2021, on postpartum hemorrhage, uterotonics, obstetrical hemorrhage, and massive hemorrhage protocols. VALIDATION METHODS: The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations). INTENDED AUDIENCE: All members of the health care team who care for labouring or postpartum women, including, but not restricted to, nurses, midwives, family physicians, obstetricians, and anesthesiologists.

A prospective multi-faceted interventional study of blood bank technologist screening of red blood cell transfusion orders: The START study.

BACKGROUND: Transfusion of red blood cells (RBC) is a common procedure, which when prescribed inappropriately can result in adverse patient outcomes. This study sought to determine the impact of a multi-faceted intervention on unnecessary RBC transfusions at hospitals with a baseline appropriateness below 90%. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective medical chart audit of RBC transfusions was conducted across 15 hospitals. For each site, 10 RBCs per month transfused to inpatients were audited for a 5-month pre- and 10-month post-intervention period, with each transfusion adjudicated for appropriateness based on pre-set criteria. Hospitals with appropriateness rates below 90% underwent a 3-month intervention which included: adoption of standardized RBC guidelines, staff education, and prospective transfusion order screening by blood bank technologists. Proportions of RBC transfusions adjudicated as appropriate and the total number of RBC units transfused per month in the pre- and post-intervention period were examined. RESULTS: Over the 15-month audit period, at the 13 hospital sites with a baseline appropriateness below 90%, 1950 patients were audited of which 81.2% were adjudicated as appropriate. Proportions of appropriateness and single-unit orders increased from 73.5% to 85% and 46.2% to 68.2%, respectively from pre- to post-intervention (P < .0001). Pre- and post-transfusion hemoglobin levels and the total number of RBCs transfused decreased from baseline (P < .05). The median pre-transfusion hemoglobin decreased from a baseline of 72.0 g/L to 69.0 g/L in the post-intervention period (P < .0001). RBC transfusions per acute inpatient days decreased significantly in intervention hospitals, but not in control hospitals (P < .001). The intervention had no impact on patient length of stay, need for intensive care support, or in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: This multifaceted intervention demonstrated a marked improvement in RBC transfusion appropriateness and reduced overall RBC utilization without impacts on patient safety.