Steffen Katherine, Doctor Allan, Hoerr Julie, Gill Jeff, Markham Chris, Brown Sarah M, Cohen Daniel, Hansen Rose, Kryzer Emily, Richards Jessica, Small Sara, Valentine Stacey, York Jennifer L, Proctor Enola K, Spinella Philip C
Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, St Louis Children's Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri;
Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, St Louis Children's Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Pediatrics. 2017 Aug;140(2). doi: 10.1542/peds.2016-2480. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
Phlebotomy excess contributes to anemia in PICU patients and increases the likelihood of red blood cell transfusion, which is associated with risk of adverse outcomes. Excessive phlebotomy reduction (EPR) strategies may reduce the need for transfusion, but have not been evaluated in a PICU population. We hypothesized that EPR strategies, facilitated by implementation science methods, would decrease excess blood drawn and reduce transfusion frequency.
Quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Patient and blood draw data were collected with survey and focus group data to evaluate knowledge and attitudes before and after EPR intervention. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to interpret qualitative data. Multivariate regression was employed to adjust for potential confounders for blood overdraw volume and transfusion incidence.
Populations were similar pre- and postintervention. EPR strategies decreased blood overdraw volumes 62% from 5.5 mL (interquartile range 1-23) preintervention to 2.1 mL (interquartile range 0-7.9 mL) postintervention ( < .001). Fewer patients received red blood cell transfusions postintervention (32.1% preintervention versus 20.7% postintervention, = .04). Regression analyses showed that EPR strategies reduced blood overdraw volume ( < .001) and lowered transfusion frequency ( = .05). Postintervention surveys reflected a high degree of satisfaction (93%) with EPR strategies, and 97% agreed EPR was a priority postintervention.
Implementation science methods aided in the selection of EPR strategies and enhanced acceptance which, in this cohort, reduced excessive overdraw volumes and transfusion frequency. Larger trials are needed to determine if this approach can be applied in broader PICU populations.
放血过量会导致儿科重症监护病房(PICU)患者贫血,并增加红细胞输血的可能性,而这与不良后果风险相关。减少放血过量(EPR)策略可能会减少输血需求,但尚未在PICU人群中进行评估。我们假设,通过实施科学方法促进的EPR策略将减少过量采血并降低输血频率。
采用定量和定性方法。通过调查收集患者和采血数据,并通过焦点小组数据评估EPR干预前后的知识和态度。使用实施研究综合框架来解释定性数据。采用多变量回归来调整血液过量抽取量和输血发生率的潜在混杂因素。
干预前后的人群相似。EPR策略使血液过量抽取量减少了62%,从干预前的5.5毫升(四分位间距1 - 23)降至干预后的2.1毫升(四分位间距0 - 7.9毫升)(P <.001)。干预后接受红细胞输血的患者减少(干预前为32.1%,干预后为20.7%,P =.04)。回归分析表明,EPR策略减少了血液过量抽取量(P <.001)并降低了输血频率(P =.05)。干预后的调查反映出对EPR策略的高度满意度(93%),并且97%的人同意EPR是干预后的优先事项。
实施科学方法有助于选择EPR策略并提高接受度,在该队列中,这减少了过量抽取量和输血频率。需要更大规模的试验来确定这种方法是否可以应用于更广泛的PICU人群。