Perhaps the most essential element in implementing a patient blood management (PBM) programme in a hospital is the dissemination of the highest quality transfusion threshold evidence to physicians so as to inform their transfusion decisions every time one is being made. Ideally this would be done in a one-on-one consultation with a transfusion medicine specialist who is well versed in the current literature. Unfortunately this is only likely possible at the smallest of hospitals. However, using electronics to disseminate this evidence can be a helpful way to engage clinicians when they are deciding if a transfusion is appropriate for their patients. This brief report will detail the experience in implementing electronic enhancements for PBM at the author’s institution.
Perhaps the single most important electronic enhancement in the field of transfusion medicine is the electronic crossmatch (EXM). In order to implement the EXM, the transfusion service must have a computer system with the following features:
- Can recognize when a recipient has a valid type and screen
- Can recognize when an ABO compatible unit has been selected for transfusion, and permit the issuing of that unit
- Can recognize when an ABO incompatible unit has been selected for transfusion, and can block the issuing of that unit
- No current or historical antibodies
- A valid type and screen (might include a requirement for a check type sample)
- Can be performed in <5 minutes
- Can be performed by virtually any member of the laboratory staff, i.e., does not require specialist knowledge of immunohematology
- Since RBCs can be crossmatched and issued in a few minutes, fewer RBCs need to be crossmatched and reserved on the transfusion service’s shelves. Permits fluid use of inventory
- Facilitates use of remote RBC unit issue, i.e., crossmatched RBC units can be stored near the operating rooms, intensive care units or emergency departments and accessed by the ward staff on demand 1,2
The first systematic effort to give feedback to clinicians on their transfusion decisions at this multi-hospital, regional health care network was a manual process. The transfusion medicine physicians would receive a daily list showing all of the transfusions that occurred at their hospitals on the previous day, as well as the antecedent and consequent laboratory values. This list would be scrutinized and if an RBC transfusion was administered at a Hb level of > 9 g/dl, a personalized letter was emailed to the ordering physician asking them to justify why the transfusion was administered (such as bleeding), and reminding them about the institutional transfusion criteria. This approach was very successful in reducing the number of transfusions that were administered at this high level, with reductions of between 38%-45% between the implementation of this program in August 2009 and its termination in April 2011 (unpublished data). The clinicians also appreciated the opportunity to justify why they were administering transfusions in this apparently non-evidence based manner (often because of acute hemorrhage), and to learn about the institution’s transfusion thresholds.
The email campaign was terminated when it became feasible to adapt the computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system to automatically generate alerts when an ordered transfusion was not substantiated by the laboratory evidence. Table 1 demonstrates the evidence based indications for transfusion that were implemented across this healthcare system.
Previous research had demonstrated that including several factors in the CPOE alert system, such as providing the alert at the time the order is being placed, providing evidence for the recommendation, and not requiring the physician to enter additional information beyond what is normally required to order products, would increase the likelihood that the alerts would be heeded.3 Thus these factors were borne in mind when the alert system was being designed.
Through a close collaboration with the institution’s information technology department, a drop down menu of evidence based indications for transfusions were generated. The ordering physician had to select from one of these indications (an Other category was also provided for orders that did not meet any of the specified criteria), and the CPOE system would check the patient’s antecedent laboratory values; if the values were consistent with the indication that the physician had ordered, the order would be transmitted to the blood bank. If the laboratory value was inconsistent with the selected indication (for example, a patient’s actual Hb value was 7.8 g/dl and the selected indication was that the patient was anemic with a Hb value <7.0 g/dl), an alert would appear on the screen informing the physician that the transfusion did not appear to be necessary based on the laboratory parameter. The alert could be overridden if the physician felt that the transfusion was still indicated. Alerts for all blood products have been implemented across the author’s institutions and the results have been impressive – between 10-15% of the alerted orders are cancelled, and the number of orders that generate an alert is also down.4-6 These alerts have been very successful in helping to decrease the number of blood products that are transfused across the author’s hospital system. For example the largest hospital in the system, an ~800 bed tertiary care hospital now transfuses <20,000 RBCs per year whereas only 7-8 years ago that figure was >30,000 RBCs per year.7
the transfusion thresholds for the alerts at this institution were arrived at by a consensus method involving the transfusion physicians, and the largest users of the blood products such as the physicians in the hematology/oncology, intensive care, surgery, and emergency departments. For example, the TRICC study indicated that a Hb <7.0 g/dl would be a safe threshold for stable ICU patients,8 but the ICU physicians at this institution were uncomfortable with that level and so it was agreed that that the alert would be generated if the Hb <7.5 g/dl. After several years of working with this threshold, the ICU physicians were reapproached and agreed that it could be lowered to the evidence based 7.0 g/dl. Thus, by working in a consensus based manner, greater acceptance of the alerts could be achieved, for the benefit of all patients.
Electronic enhancements can also be applied to reduce blood product waste. At the author’s institution, whole blood platelets (PLT) are the predominant PLT product. As these PLTs must be pooled to create an adult dose and subsequently stored at room temperature, the resulting 4 hour shelf life can lead to wastage if they are not transfused within that time. To this end, the method by which the nursing staff communicates with the blood bank when a blood product is to be issued to a patient was recently modified. Previously, a hard copy patient identification form (PIF) was sent to the blood bank indicating when the product should be issued. However, frequently the patient was not actually prepared to receive the transfusion, and the product would be wasted. A new electronic PIF (ePIF) was designed and incorporated into the electronic medical record. This new ePIF screen requires the nurse to verify that the patient had given consent for the transfusion, that the required vascular access was present and that any pre-transfusion medications had been administered. In the year following the ePIF implementation, PLT waste was significantly reduced compared to the preceding 19 months.9 Somewhat unexpectedly, RBC waste was also decreased after ePIF implementation.
Pre-operative anemia management is an essential part of a broad-based PBM program. Anemia is a risk factor for many diseases and itself can be a marker of serious illness. At the author’s institution, all surgical patients are scheduled using a single computer program.10 As part of the institution’s comprehensive PBM program, when a patient is scheduled for surgery, an automated script begins to search through multiple databases looking for Hb values. When an anemic Hb value is detected (using the WHO classification of anemia), an email and/or facsimile report is sent to the patient’s surgeon and/or family doctor indicating that the patient is anemic and its cause should be investigated before the date of surgery. These notifications have been successful in alerting surgeons and physicians to patients with anemia, and over 45% of the patients on whom an alert was sent received some form of treatment or intervention to resolve their anemia. One limitation to this alert is that it was discovered that the surgeons were only ordering pre-operative Hb testing a mean of 15 days before the surgery date, thereby limiting the nature of the interventions that could be implemented to correct the anemia. Encouraging surgeons to evaluate their patients for anemia more in advance of the surgery should help to improve the efficacy of anemia management, when required.
- Guidelines for the specification, implementation and management of information technology systems in hospital transfusion laboratoriesTransfusion Medicine 2014;24:341–371.
- Guidelines for pre-transfusion compatibility procedures in blood transfusion laboratories - British Committee for Standards in HaematologyTransfusion Medicine 2013;23:3–35.
|Hgb ≤ 7.0g/dL and/or Hct ≤ 22% in a hemodynamically stable ICU patient.|
|Hgb ≤ 8.0g/dL and/or Hct ≤ 24% in a non-ICU patient with symptomatic anemia.|
|Hgb ≤ 10g/dL and/or Hct ≤ 30% in a patient experiencing acute ischemic cardiovascular disease (angina pectoris, acute myocardial infarction).|
|Acute bleeding with hemodynamic instability requiring urgent RBC transfusion.|
|Fibrinogen <100 mg/dl AND active bleeding OR pre-procedure|
|Prophylactic transfusion to prevent spontaneous bleeding in stable patient with platelet count <10,000/ul|
|Prophylactic transfusion to prevent spontaneous bleeding in patient with consumptive state (eg high fever, sepsis, DIC, or splenomegaly) and platelet count <20,000/ul|
|Active bleeding or Pre-procedure with platelet count <50,000/ul|
|Pre-procedure or bleeding patient who has taken a recent dose of anti-platelet medications, or with documented platelet dysfunction (abnormal closure time, abnormal TEG result)|
|Massive bleeding requiring multiple RBC transfusions|
|INR ≥1.6 and the patient is currently bleeding or pre-procedure and NOT a candidate for vitamin K|
|Massive bleeding requiring multiple RBC transfusions|
|Plasma required for therapeutic exchange|
- Electronic remote blood issue: a combination of remote blood issue with a system for end-to-end electronic control of transfusion to provide a "total solution" for a safe and timely hospital blood transfusion service.Transfusion 2008;48: 415-24.
- How do we monitor hospital transfusion practice using an end-to-end electronic transfusion management system?Transfusion 2012;52: 2502-12.
- Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success.BMJ 2005;330: 765.
- Evaluation of real-time clinical decision support systems for platelet and cryoprecipitate orders. American journal of clinical pathology 2014;141: 78-84.
- Trends in RBC Ordering and Use After Implementing Adaptive Alerts in the Electronic Computerized Physician Order Entry System.American journal of clinical pathology 2014;141: 534-41.
- Effectiveness of a real-time clinical decision support system for computerized physician order entry of plasma orders. Transfusion 2013;53: 3120-7.
- Changes in blood product utilization in a 7 hospital system after the implementation of a patient blood management program: A 9 year follow up. Hematology, 2016 Feb 17:1-10.
- A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial of transfusion requirements in critical care. Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care Investigators, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group.The New England journal of medicine 1999;340: 409-17.
- Electronic enhancements to blood ordering reduce component waste.Transfusion 2016 Mar;56(3):564-70.
- The effect of automated alerts on preoperative anemia management.Hematology 2015;20: 160-4.
The content of this resource has been developed and reviewed by members of the ISBT Clinical Transfusion Working Party and should be used at the discretion of healthcare professionals utilising this clinical resource. The authors or the International Society of Blood Transfusion cannot accept legal responsibility for the content of this resource.