Systematic Criteria for Type and Screen Based on Procedure's Probability of Erythrocyte Transfusion

Author:

Dexter Franklin1,Ledolter Johannes2,Davis Erika3,Witkowski Thomas A.4,Herman Jay H.5,Epstein Richard H.6

Affiliation:

1. Professor and Director, Division of Management Consulting, Department of Anesthesia.

2. C. Maxwell Stanley Professor of International Operations Management, Department of Management Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.

3. Resident, Anesthesiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

4. Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, Jefferson Medical College, and Director of Patient Testing Center of Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

5. Professor, Department of Pathology, Anatomy & Cell Biology, Jefferson Medical College, and Director of the Blood Bank, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital.

6. Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, Jefferson Medical College.

Abstract

Background At many hospitals, the type and screen decision is guided by the hospital's maximum surgical blood order schedule, a document that includes for each scheduled (elective) surgical procedure a recommendation of whether a preoperative type and screen be performed. There is substantial heterogeneity in the scientific literature for how that decision should be made. Methods Anesthesia information management system data were retrieved from the 160,207 scheduled noncardiac cases in adults of 1,253 procedures at a hospital. Results Neither assuming a Poisson distribution of mean erythrocyte units transfused, nor grouping rare procedures into larger groups based on their anesthesia Current Procedural Terminology code, was reliable. In contrast, procedures could be defined to have minimal estimated blood loss (less than 50 ml) based on low incidence of transfusion and low incidence of the hemoglobin being checked preoperatively. Among these procedures, when the lower 95% confidence limit for erythrocyte transfusion was less than 5%, type and screen was shown to be unnecessary. The method was useful based on including multiple differences from the hospital's maximum surgical blood order schedule and clinicians' test ordering (greater than or equal to 29% fewer type and screen). Results were the same with a Bayesian random effects model. Conclusions We validated a method to determine procedures on the maximum surgical blood order schedule for which type and screen was not indicated using the estimated blood losses and incidences of transfusion.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Reference37 articles.

Cited by 48 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3