Spradbrow Jordan, Cohen Robert, Lin Yulia, Armali Chantal, Collins Allison, Cserti-Gazdewich Christine, Lieberman Lani, Pavenski Katerina, Pendergrast Jacob, Webert Kathryn, Callum Jeannie
Department of Clinical Pathology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; the, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto; and the, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Transfusion. 2016 Oct;56(10):2466-2476. doi: 10.1111/trf.13737. Epub 2016 Jul 27.
Evaluating the appropriateness of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requires labor-intensive medical chart audits and expert adjudication. We sought to determine the appropriateness of RBC transfusions at 10 hospitals using retrospective chart review and to determine whether simple metrics (proportion of single-unit transfusions, RBCs/100 acute inpatient days, proportion of transfusions with pretransfusion hemoglobin <80 g/L or posttransfusion hemoglobin <90 g/L) could be used as surrogate markers of appropriateness by comparing their values with the results from the audit.
An initial block of 30 RBC units was dually adjudicated for appropriateness followed by additional blocks of 10 units until the difference between the cumulative percentage of appropriate RBC units in the preceding block and final block was <3%. Pearson correlation tests were used to evaluate associations between the metrics and percentages of appropriate transfusions per hospital. Two-by-two tables were used to assess the utility of the metrics to classify transfusions for appropriateness.
Of the 498 units audited, 78% were adjudicated as appropriate (κ = 0.9603), with significant variability between institutions (p < 0.0001). Fifty audits or less were required at nine of the institutions. The values of the metrics were not found to have significant correlations with appropriateness, and the metric that misclassified the smallest proportion of transfusions for appropriateness was pretransfusion hemoglobin <80 g/L, at 24%.
Our findings suggest that a chart audit of 50 RBC transfusions with adjudication using robust criteria is the optimal means of evaluating RBC transfusion appropriateness at an institution for benchmarking and quality-improvement initiatives.
评估红细胞(RBC)输血的适宜性需要耗费大量人力的病历审核和专家判定。我们试图通过回顾性病历审查来确定10家医院红细胞输血的适宜性,并通过将简单指标(单单位输血比例、每100个急性住院日的红细胞用量、输血前血红蛋白<80 g/L或输血后血红蛋白<90 g/L的输血比例)的值与审核结果进行比较,来确定这些指标是否可作为适宜性的替代指标。
最初对30个红细胞单位进行双重适宜性判定,随后再对10个单位的批次进行判定,直至前一批次和最后一批次中适宜红细胞单位的累积百分比差异<3%。使用Pearson相关检验来评估各指标与每家医院适宜输血百分比之间的关联。使用2×2列联表来评估这些指标对输血适宜性分类的效用。
在审核 的498个单位中,78%被判定为适宜(κ = 0.9603),各机构之间存在显著差异(p < 0.0001)。9家机构所需的审核次数为50次或更少。未发现这些指标的值与适宜性有显著相关性,对输血适宜性误分类比例最小的指标是输血前血红蛋白<80 g/L,为24%。
我们的研究结果表明,对50例红细胞输血进行病历审核并使用严格标准进行判定,是评估机构内红细胞输血适宜性以进行基准比较和质量改进举措的最佳方法。