Nationwide survey of home transfusion practices.

BACKGROUND: Limited information exists on home transfusion practices. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In 1995, a survey requesting data for 1994 was sent to 1273 American Association of Blood Banks (AABB) institutional members and 113 non-AABB home health care agencies that provide out-of-hospital transfusions. RESULTS: Of 943 respondents, 102 provide blood to a home transfusion program, 37 provide blood and run a home transfusion program, and 13 run a home transfusion program only, for a total of 152 (16%) with some involvement in home blood transfusions. Most of the 50 respondents with a home transfusion program are licensed by their state and accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. All respondents have written policies for home transfusion, and 90 percent require a signed informed-consent document before initiating transfusions in the home. Most have policies requiring that there be a second adult and a telephone in the home, that the home be deemed safe for transfusion, that the patient's physician be readily available, and that the patient have had prior transfusions. The most common component issued by the blood providers was red cells, followed by platelets. White cell-reduced components were always provided by 36 percent of respondents. The most common patient diagnosis was cancer. Home transfusions were provided primarily by registered nurses. Only 14 percent of respondents indicated that the medical director of the blood bank is responsible for approving a patient for home transfusion. A posttransfusion visit is performed by 46 percent of respondents. CONCLUSION: Although most facilities have policies for the administration of home transfusions, there remains marked heterogeneity among blood providers and transfusionists regarding home transfusion practices.

Practice parameter for the use of red blood cell transfusions: developed by the Red Blood Cell Administration Practice Guideline Development Task Force of the College of American Pathologists.

A practice parameter has been developed to assist physicians in the therapeutic use of red blood cell transfusions. The developers of this parameter used the best available information from the medical literature, as well as clinical experience and the extensive reality testing required by the College of American Pathologists for approval. In acute anemia, a fall in hemoglobin values below 6 g/dL or a rapid blood volume loss of more than 30% to 40% requires red blood cell transfusions in most patients. However, tissue oxygenation provides a better indication of physiologic need in situations where invasive monitoring provides this information. When these data are not available, heart rate and blood pressure measurements and the nature of bleeding (active, controlled, uncontrolled) supplement the hemoglobin value in guiding the transfusion decision. In sickle cell disease and thalassemias, red blood cells are transfused to prevent acute or chronic complications. Red blood cell transfusions are used in chronic anemias unresponsive to pharmacologic agents based on the patient's symptoms. Guidelines must be altered for neonates who require an increase in hematocrit to above 0.30 to 0.35 when respiratory distress is present. Indications for red blood cell transfusion for the pregnant or postpartum patient are similar to those for the nonpregnant patient. Risks of transfusion, particularly transmissible disease and incompatibility, remain but have been reduced. Thus, red blood cell transfusion continues to be a powerful therapeutic tool when used judiciously and carries less risk than in the recent past.

Guidelines for blood utilization review.

Hospitals are required by accrediting agencies to perform blood utilization review. Specific areas that must be addressed are the ordering, distribution, handling, dispensing, and administration of blood components. Monitoring the effects of transfusion on patients is also required. The format of the review process and the criteria for appropriate blood utilization must be developed by each institution. This article provides examples of areas that can be reviewed and procedures that may be used. However, the suggested laboratory values must not be interpreted as defining indications or criteria for transfusion. Each transfusion committee, or its equivalent, is responsible for developing its own institutional blood utilization procedures and audit criteria. Review and approval by the medical staff prior to implementation are essential. The procedures must also be reviewed and revised on a regular basis.

The red blood cell transfusion trigger. Physiology and clinical studies.

The need for red blood cell transfusion is determined by the etiology, chronicity, and severity of anemia, the patient's ability to compensate for decreased oxygen carrying capacity, and tissue oxygen requirements. The compensatory mechanisms invoked by acute blood loss differ from the physiologic adaptations to chronic anemia. Factors such as myocardial depression and inadequate ventilation can also decrease oxygen delivery, but their occurrence cannot be reliably predicted, particularly in surgical patients. A margin of safety is therefore necessary to prevent inadequate oxygen delivery and potential morbidity and mortality in anemic patients. Appropriate use of pharmacologic agents can obviate the need for red blood cell administration in some chronically anemic patients. There is no single red blood cell transfusion trigger. The entire clinical picture not just the hemoglobin, must be considered in each patient.

Controversies in transfusion medicine. Perioperative hemodilution: pro.

Hemodilution can obviate the need for allogeneic transfusion in some patients. However, it is only one component of a comprehensive blood conservation program and should be combined with other techniques whenever possible. While most often employed in teenagers and healthy young adults, ANH has been used in small children, the elderly, and patients of all ages who are undergoing cardiac surgery. Extreme caution should be exercised if ANH is used in patients with coronary artery disease or aortic stenosis who are undergoing noncardiac surgery, because their normal compensatory mechanisms are impaired. What usually is a safe and relatively simple procedure can become a disaster if employed in inappropriately selected patients. Careful hemodynamic monitoring and maintenance of normovolemia are critical.

Preoperative autologous donation: surgery clinic staff knowledge/attitudes. Preoperative Autologous Blood Donation Study Group.

Preoperative autologous blood donation (PABD) is both under- and overused. Although the decision to order PABD lies with the surgeon, it is quite likely that other surgery clinic personnel influence patient acceptance and enrollment into PABD programs. Accordingly, we measured knowledge, attitudes, and the referral practice of clinic personnel pertaining to PABD. We administered a questionnaire to 102 nurses and 33 clerks working in surgery clinics at three university medical centers--one center in an area with a high incidence of AIDS and two centers in areas of low incidence of AIDS. Knowledge of PABD was poor when assessed by six questions. Only 6% each of nurses and clerks answered all questions correctly; 55% of nurses and 54% clerks missed three or more of the six questions. Surprisingly, no differences (P > .05) in knowledge deficits were noted when personnel from high and low AIDS areas were compared--indicating an overall need for education about PABD. In general, attitudes about PABD were positive, as most respondents (63%) gave favorable answers. Clinic personnel from the high AIDS area had even more favorable attitudes (P = .02). Because of these favorable attitudes, it seems likely that educational programs dealing with PABD would be readily accepted by clinic personnel. Greater knowledge should enhance the effectiveness of clinic staff in identifying, counseling, and referring eligible patients for this service.

Efficacy of preoperative donation of blood for autologous use in radical prostatectomy.

To determine the amount of blood lost, the number of transfusions, and the effectiveness of preoperative autologous blood donation in radical prostatectomy, 163 patients' records from 1987 to 1991 were reviewed at four university hospitals and three community hospitals. Calculated red cell volume lost was 1003 +/- 535 mL (mean +/- SD), which corresponds to 44 +/- 18 percent (mean +/- SD) of total red cell volume. Preoperative donation of blood for autologous use reduced the rate of transfusion of allogeneic blood from 66 to 20 percent (p < 0.001). Of the patients who donated 1 to 2 units, 32 percent received allogeneic blood; 14 percent of those who donated 3 units received allogeneic blood. Donation of 4 units reduced the allogeneic transfusion rate to 11 percent. However, as the number of units donated increased (1-3 units), the units not transfused also increased (0-21%). Ninety-one (56%) of 163 patients donated fewer than 3 units. Autologous blood donation is effective in minimizing the transfusion of allogeneic blood to radical prostatectomy patients, but many patients do not donate enough blood (< 3 units). The donation of 3 units of blood for autologous use is recommended for patients who undergo radical prostatectomy.

Improvement in appropriate autologous donations with local education: 1987 to 1989.

Preoperative autologous blood donation for elective surgery patients at university hospitals was underused in the past. More recently, national educational efforts have been made. To test the impact of local surgeon interviews and education, in 1988 the same local educational program was instituted at three university hospitals; three community hospitals were used as controls. Donation by appropriate patients of interviewed surgeons (elective surgery, crossmatch recommended, no contraindications to donation) increased from 24 percent (44/180) to 40 percent (88/222) (p = 0.002) and 15 percent (21/143) to 32 percent (41/127) (p = 0.001) at two university hospitals where the investigator-educators were on site, but not at the three community hospitals. Between 1987 and 1989, donation rates at all six hospitals remained low among patients for whom autologous donation was (probably) less appropriate. Donation rates for type and screen procedures were 3.0 percent (131/4587) in 1987 and 3.0 percent (199/6606) in 1989 (p = 0.67). Donation rates for "no blood order" procedures were 0.2 percent (15/9429) in 1987 and 0.1 percent (9/11,239) in 1989 (p = 0.14). It can be concluded that appropriate autologous blood donations increased at university hospitals where surgeons were individually interviewed and educated by an investigator on site. However, despite this increase, apparently eligible elective surgery patients in 1989 still failed to donate. This situation deserves additional investigation.

Blood loss and replacement in total hip arthroplasty: a multicenter study. The Preoperative Autologous Blood Donation Study Group.

To determine blood loss, the number of transfusions, and the hemoglobin levels achieved in patients via transfusion in the course of total hip arthroplasty, 324 patient records from 1987 through 1989 were reviewed at three university and three community hospitals. Calculated blood loss was 3.2 +/- 1.3 units in primary procedures and 4.0 +/- 2.1 units in revision procedures (mean +/- SD). Of 777 red cell units transfused, 455 (59%) were autologous units. Transfused patients received 2.0 +/- 1.8 units for primary procedures and 2.9 +/- 2.3 units for revision procedures (mean +/- SD). The maximum number of units given to 95 percent of the transfused patients was 4 for primary procedures and 6 for revision procedures. The mean postoperative hemoglobin level after all transfusions was 103 to 110 g per L, regardless of patient age group of physical status, autologous donor status, or hospital. No difference in length of hospital stay was observed for patients less than 65 years old with hemoglobin concentrations of 80 to 139 g per L at discharge.

Probable reasons that autologous blood was not donated by patients having surgery for which crossmatched blood was ordered.

Preoperative autologous blood donation is used by only a small percentage of surgery patients for whom crossmatched blood is ordered. To document the reasons the patients failed to donate, the medical records of surgical patients at three university and three community hospitals were studied. All procedures for which crossmatched blood was ordered, but for which autologous blood was not available, were included (n = 8121). Probable reasons for nondonation were found in 72 percent of university hospital patients and 65 percent of community hospital patients (n = 6064 and n = 2057, respectively). The most frequent reasons for nondonation among university hospital patients were emergency surgery (27%) and age less than 12 years (17%), and those among community hospital patients were emergency surgery (42%) and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status greater than or equal to 4 (20%). Surprisingly, anemia (hemoglobin less than 11 g/dL [less than 110 g/L]) as the only limitation to donation was rarely found: this was the sole reason in only 3.3 percent of university hospital and 4.5 percent of community hospital patients. Overall, of 8121 patients who failed to donate autologous blood, 5731 (71%) had legitimate medical reasons. The remaining 2390 (29%) had no identifiable reason for nondonation, and recruitment efforts should be focused on them and their surgeons.

Indications for perioperative blood transfusion in 1990.

Rational transfusion practices are determined by clinical evaluation and utilization of appropriate laboratory tests. While the trend toward more conservative transfusion practices is laudable, blood transfusions should not be withheld because of fear of transfusion-transmitted disease. The blood supply is safer than ever before and advances in monitoring and laboratory testing are facilitating scientific approaches to blood administration.

Donor room personnel attitudes toward autologous donors.

Patients with serious illnesses who donate their blood for autologous use create anxiety for many phlebotomists. Donor room staff were surveyed at three donor centers, using confidential questionnaires, to identify their concerns and to evaluate factors associated with reduced anxiety toward autologous donors. Among respondents (n = 93), 58 percent had patient care experience within the last 5 years, which correlated with diminished concern about phlebotomizing cardiac patients (r = .21; p = 0.04). Fifty-seven percent of respondents had drawn blood from greater than 50 autologous donors. Surprisingly, the experience of drawing blood from relatively large numbers of autologous donors did not correlate with increased confidence in phlebotomizing pediatric, cardiac, and elderly patients (r = -.04; p = 0.75). Those respondents who felt that they had adequate medical support agreed with more liberal donor criteria and were more confident about phlebotomizing pediatric, cardiac, and elderly patients (r = -.32; p = 0.001). Those respondents who believed most strongly in the benefits of autologous transfusion had the least anxiety toward donors who were medically more complex (r = .39; p = 0.0001). It is concluded that, contrary to what might be expected, phlebotomizing large numbers of autologous donors does not reduce the anxiety of staff members when they encounter donors with complex medical problems. Factors that do reduce anxiety include dependable physician and other medical support services, previous experience in direct patient care, and knowledge of the benefits of autologous transfusion.

Autologous blood salvage procedures.

Autologous transfusion is not a luxury. Some states have passed legislation mandating that surgical patients be informed of the alternatives to homologous blood administration as well as the risks and benefits of transfusion. Technological advances have made autologous blood salvage in surgery, the postoperative period, and certain trauma situations a safe and relatively inexpensive procedure. While there is minimal data documenting the quality of blood which is administered without processing, extensive clinical experience attests to the safety of the procedure. Ample clinical and laboratory data support the safety of reinfusing processed blood.