4.2 Article

Single-unit transfusions and hemoglobin trigger: relative impact on red cell utilization

Journal

TRANSFUSION
Volume 57, Issue 5, Pages 1163-1170

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/trf.14000

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Haemonetics (Braintree, MA)
  2. Zimmer-Biomet (Warsaw, IN)
  3. Medtronic (Minneapolis, MN)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Patient blood management (PBM) programs can reduce unnecessary transfusions, but the optimal methods used to achieve this effect are unclear. We tested the hypothesis that encouraging single-unit red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in stable patients would have a greater impact on blood use than compliance with a specific hemoglobin (Hb) transfusion trigger alone. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed blood utilization data at three community hospitals without previous PBM efforts before and after implementing a PBM program. Data were analyzed at monthly intervals to determine the relative impact of a Why give 2 when 1 will do? campaign promoting single-unit RBC transfusions and simultaneous efforts to promote evidence-based Hb triggers of 7 or 8 g/dL. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify independent effects of these two interventions on overall RBC utilization. RESULTS: Univariate analysis revealed that both the increase in single-unit transfusions (from 38.0% to 70.9%; p< 0.0001) and the decrease in RBC orders with an Hb trigger of at least 8 g/dL (from 45.7% to 25.0%; p< 0.0001) were associated with decreasing RBC utilization. Multivariate analysis showed that the increase in single-unit transfusions was an independent predictor of decreased RBC utilization, but the Hb triggers of both 7 and 8 g/dL were not. Overall, our PBM efforts decreased RBC utilization from 0.254 to 0.185 units/patient (27.2%) across all three hospitals (p=0.0009). CONCLUSIONS: A campaign promoting single-unit RBC transfusions had a greater impact on RBC utilization than did encouraging a restrictive transfusion trigger.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available