Opportunities to improve feedback to reduce blood component wastage: Results of a national scheme evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Blood components are costly and scarce. The Blood Stocks Management Scheme (BSMS) was established in the United Kingdom (UK) to support hospital transfusion services and national blood services through collection, analysis, and monthly feedback of data on blood component inventory and wastage management. There is a growing evidence base on how best to deliver feedback for quality improvement. We assessed the quality and utility of the monthly BSMS component reports. METHODS: We assessed the content of BSMS reports issued in March 2023 against established criteria for effective feedback. Two researchers independently rated whether criteria spanning the five domains of goal setting, data collection, feedback content, feedback display and feedback delivery were fully, partially or not met. Disagreements were resolved through discussion. We conducted an online questionnaire survey of recipients of BSMS reports during March 2023 to assess their use of reports and seek suggestions for improvement. RESULTS: Five out of 20 criteria for effective feedback were fully met. Areas for improvement included placing more emphasis in the feedback on positive change, linking data and summary messages, and including specific suggestions for action. Respondents highlighted the value of benchmarked comparisons with other hospital transfusion services. CONCLUSION: There is scope for enhancing the effectiveness and utility of BSMS feedback reports and hence reducing wastage of blood components. This methodology for evaluation of feedback could be utilized to improve other areas of transfusion practice.

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.

How to verify patient identity and blood product compatibility using an electronic bedside transfusion system.

Transfusion of an incorrect blood component is an important avoidable serious hazard of transfusion resulting from process errors. Our group and others have taken advantage of new technology and developed electronic transfusion systems for safe transfusion practice in a previous studies. They allow the clinical staff to correctly identify the patient and the blood product at the bedside, ensuring the right blood product is given to the right patient. This video is to demonstrate the process and not to promote any specific product. It is a follow up our previous video clip on electronic remote blood issue in a previous study. The process for correct patient identification originates from the wristband, which contains the patient identification details in a 2D barcode and is printed from the electronic patient record system. These details are associated with the blood sample through using a portable printer to produce a label for the sample tube. The patient details are scanned into the blood bank laboratory information system (LIS) and are then printed on a compatibility label by the LIS, which also contains a 2-dimensional barcode, and is then attached to the blood product. Following an initial visual check of these details by the clinical staff, the electronic bedside system requires that both the patient wristband barcode and the blood product compatibility barcode are scanned. This will electronically verify at the patient's bedside that the right unit is to be given to the right patient. This is the final step in ensuring end-to-end electronic control and safe transfusion practice.

How do we use electronic clinical decision support and feedback to promote good transfusion practice.

This report describes the evolution of the electronic clinical decision support system (CDSS) and feedback methods at our center and the challenges and lessons learned. The electronic blood product order with integrated CDSS ensures collection of data regarding the patient's clinical condition and the justification for the blood product order. An alert is generated in real time if the order is placed outside agreed guidelines. We have provided feedback in several ways. We began with monthly review meetings with the junior hematology clinicians responsible for ordering blood. This was successful in reducing unjustified transfusions in this setting. We expanded the feedback to the rest of our hospitals in two ways. First, a dashboard was developed allowing visualization of ordering data by clinicians. Second, these data were summarized on a quarterly basis into a report circulated to the senior clinical staff by e-mail. Finally, a daily report collates all orders placed for blood products that have triggered a CDSS alert from the previous day. A multidisciplinary team reviews these daily. If an order appears unjustified the specialist transfusion clinician contacts the prescribing clinician to ask for further information and, if necessary, provides education. The CDSS and feedback, allied with other patient blood management measures, have reduced total blood product costs for our hospitals by 26% over 6 years. The description of how we have developed and implemented CDSS and feedback to influence transfusion practice may be of particular value to others developing their own systems.

Electronic remote blood issue supports efficient and timely supply of blood and cost reduction: evidence from five hospitals at different stages of implementation.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter international study evaluated electronic remote blood issue (ERBI) for blood unit collection in hospitals. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from the ERBI software databases and blood bank information systems. Prospective "time-and-motion" data collection methods simulated the delivery of red blood cell units to determine the staff time for each step. RESULTS: The main benefit of ERBI was found in two hospitals where the blood unit was issued and collected at refrigerators remote from the blood bank (closer to the clinical area) compared with the standard process of blood bank issue (BBI) and blood unit collection in the blood bank. There was a reduction in the time for blood to reach patients (2.02 min compared to 8.43 min at one site [p ≤ 0.0001], 1.57 min compared to 6.54 min at the other [p ≤ 0.0001]). However, there was no reduction in time where ERBI was conducted in the blood bank or where a blood unit issued by the standard BBI was collected at remote refrigerators. In the three hospitals where ERBI was conducted at remote refrigerators, there was an improved issue:transfusion ratio (range of 1.02-1.09 for ERBI compared to 1.48-1.58 for BBI) and a reduction in staff time and costs of between $5,000 and $10,000/year. CONCLUSION: This multicenter international study builds on findings from studies in single hospitals that ERBI at remote refrigerators improves the efficiency of transfusion by reducing the time taken for blood units to reach patients, staff time, and costs.