Critical conversations on patient blood management with clinical colleagues.

Although a subspecialty-trained transfusion medicine (TM) physician brings value to the clinical bedside, hospital transfusion service oversight often falls under the responsibility of pathologists primarily focused on surgical pathology. Yet, pathologists who lack TM fellowship training may not be quite as confident in their role as the TM physician in-charge, especially when the need to communicate with another clinician arises. Given that blood is a resource subject to frequent shortages, there is a need for constant monitoring of blood utilization such that those responsible for transfusion service oversight need to handle challenging clinical interactions when transfusion guidelines are breeched. Generally, the average pathologist is more knowledgeable regarding blood component therapy than other clinician. Yet, disagreements concerning patient transfusion management can arise, in spite of established evidence-based hospital transfusion guidelines. Since authoritative fact stating is not likely to be effective in changing the entrenched practices, pathologists must engage in strategies that will develop meaningful working relationships with their clinical colleagues. Such strategies include being a visible part of direct patient care, such as attendance at patient rounds or provision of mini-consultations by phone regarding transfusion management. Inviting clinicians to attend the hospital transfusion committee meetings and scheduling educational grand rounds are also useful strategies. Clinicians may be more receptive to blood conservation during times of shortages if open communication is established, particularly if hospital leadership is involved in urgent crisis messaging to the clinicians and other hospital staff involved in patient care.

How do we obtain and maintain patient blood management certification?

BACKGROUND: The creation of a patient blood management (PBM) certification program by The Joint Commission (TJC) and Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies (AABB) provides validation of an existing PBM program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A team of subject matter experts in PBM formed a working group to develop a structured approach to guide PBM programs through the PBM certification. Program challenges and metrics were reviewed. RESULTS: Initial steps to establishing PBM certification include a multidisciplinary working group and hospital administration buy-in. Development of policies and procedures individualized to the facility will standardize practice. An institutional transfusion committee can provide PBM oversight including enforcing compliance. Using resources such as TJC and AABB standards and tools including electronic medical records (EMR) can track and trend hospital PBM performance and identify improvement opportunities. A gap analysis tool helps implementation. Challenges might include maintaining a PBM program during a merger, slow responsiveness of information systems (IS) to requests, PBM education for both the Transfusion Safety Officer (TSO) and hospital staff with constant turnover. Available metrics from one hospital system showed good compliance with transfusion thresholds (average all products: 97.9%, 2019, 2020). In 2020, through educational efforts the cost savings were $124,856.70 compared to 2019. Regarding single unit transfusion of RBCs, this was 62.25% (2019), 63.75% (2020), 72.00% (2021), and surpassed the target goal of 60%. CONCLUSIONS: Obtaining PBM certification highlights the success of an institution's PBM program. Facilities that have achieved PBM certification have seen significant reductions in transfusions and considerable cost savings.