Differential impact of transfusion guidelines on blood transfusion practices within a health network

Author:

Balafas Spyros,Gagliano Vanessa,Di Serio Clelia,Guidugli Giuglia Andrea,Saporito Andrea,Gabutti Luca,Ferrari Paolo

Abstract

AbstractWhether clinical practice guidelines have a significant impact on practice is unclear. The effect of guideline recommendations on clinical practice often a lags behind the date of publication. We evaluated by means of a data-driven approach if and when the guidelines on red blood cell transfusions (RBCTs) issued by Swiss Smarter Medicine in 2016 had an impact on RBCTs practice within a hospital network, where awareness of guidelines was promoted mainly among internal medicine specialties. Data on RBCTs performed in a Swiss hospital network from January 2014 to April 2021 were analyzed by hospital site and specialty to assess whether guidelines led to a decrease in inappropriate RBCTs. RBCTs were defined as “inappropriate” if patients had a hemoglobin level ≥ 70 g/L without or ≥ 80 g/L with significant cardiovascular comorbidities. Changes in the rate of inappropriate transfusions were analyzed with an advanced statistical approach that included generalized additive models. Overall prior to March 2017 there were more inappropriate than appropriate RBCTs, but after October 2017 the opposite could be observed. A change-point in the time trend was estimated from transfusion data to occur in the time interval between March and October 2017. This change was mainly driven by practice changes in the medical wards, while no significant change was observed in the critical care, surgical and oncology wards. Change in practice varied by hospital site. In conclusion, our results show that a significant change in the RBCTs practice at the hospital level occurred approximately 18 months after national guidelines were issued.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Cited by 2 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