Critical Value Reporting in Transfusion Medicine

Erika M. Reese, Randin C. Nelson, Willy A. Flegel, Karen M. Byrne, Garrett S. Booth

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: While critical value procedures have been adopted in most areas of the clinical laboratory, their use in transfusion medicine has not been reviewed in detail. The results of this study present a comprehensive overview of critical value reporting and communication practices in transfusion medicine in the United States. Methods: A web-based survey was developed to collect data on the prevalence of critical value procedures and practices of communicating results. The survey was distributed via email to US hospital-based blood banks. Results: Of 123 facilities surveyed, 84 (68.3%) blood banks had a critical value procedure. From a panel of 23 common blood bank results, nine results were selected by more than 70% of facilities as either a critical value or requiring rapid communication as defined by an alternate procedure. Conclusions: There was overlap among results communicated by facilities with and without a critical value procedure. The most frequently communicated results, such as incompatible crossmatch for RBC units issued uncrossmatched, delay in finding compatible blood due to a clinically significant antibody, and transfusion reaction evaluation suggestive of a serious adverse event, addressed scenarios associated with the leading reported causes of transfusion-related fatalities.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)492-499
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Clinical Pathology
Volume147
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Transfusion Medicine
Blood Banks
Antibodies

Keywords

  • Blood bank
  • Communication
  • Critical values
  • Results
  • Transfusion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

Critical Value Reporting in Transfusion Medicine. / Reese, Erika M.; Nelson, Randin C.; Flegel, Willy A.; Byrne, Karen M.; Booth, Garrett S.

In: American Journal of Clinical Pathology, Vol. 147, No. 5, 01.05.2017, p. 492-499.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Reese, Erika M. ; Nelson, Randin C. ; Flegel, Willy A. ; Byrne, Karen M. ; Booth, Garrett S. / Critical Value Reporting in Transfusion Medicine. In: American Journal of Clinical Pathology. 2017 ; Vol. 147, No. 5. pp. 492-499.
@article{9d7a585bdedf48e996f4ebc1559dc8f5,
title = "Critical Value Reporting in Transfusion Medicine",
abstract = "Objectives: While critical value procedures have been adopted in most areas of the clinical laboratory, their use in transfusion medicine has not been reviewed in detail. The results of this study present a comprehensive overview of critical value reporting and communication practices in transfusion medicine in the United States. Methods: A web-based survey was developed to collect data on the prevalence of critical value procedures and practices of communicating results. The survey was distributed via email to US hospital-based blood banks. Results: Of 123 facilities surveyed, 84 (68.3{\%}) blood banks had a critical value procedure. From a panel of 23 common blood bank results, nine results were selected by more than 70{\%} of facilities as either a critical value or requiring rapid communication as defined by an alternate procedure. Conclusions: There was overlap among results communicated by facilities with and without a critical value procedure. The most frequently communicated results, such as incompatible crossmatch for RBC units issued uncrossmatched, delay in finding compatible blood due to a clinically significant antibody, and transfusion reaction evaluation suggestive of a serious adverse event, addressed scenarios associated with the leading reported causes of transfusion-related fatalities.",
keywords = "Blood bank, Communication, Critical values, Results, Transfusion",
author = "Reese, {Erika M.} and Nelson, {Randin C.} and Flegel, {Willy A.} and Byrne, {Karen M.} and Booth, {Garrett S.}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/ajcp/aqx025",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "147",
pages = "492--499",
journal = "American Journal of Clinical Pathology",
issn = "0002-9173",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Pathologists",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Critical Value Reporting in Transfusion Medicine

AU - Reese, Erika M.

AU - Nelson, Randin C.

AU - Flegel, Willy A.

AU - Byrne, Karen M.

AU - Booth, Garrett S.

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - Objectives: While critical value procedures have been adopted in most areas of the clinical laboratory, their use in transfusion medicine has not been reviewed in detail. The results of this study present a comprehensive overview of critical value reporting and communication practices in transfusion medicine in the United States. Methods: A web-based survey was developed to collect data on the prevalence of critical value procedures and practices of communicating results. The survey was distributed via email to US hospital-based blood banks. Results: Of 123 facilities surveyed, 84 (68.3%) blood banks had a critical value procedure. From a panel of 23 common blood bank results, nine results were selected by more than 70% of facilities as either a critical value or requiring rapid communication as defined by an alternate procedure. Conclusions: There was overlap among results communicated by facilities with and without a critical value procedure. The most frequently communicated results, such as incompatible crossmatch for RBC units issued uncrossmatched, delay in finding compatible blood due to a clinically significant antibody, and transfusion reaction evaluation suggestive of a serious adverse event, addressed scenarios associated with the leading reported causes of transfusion-related fatalities.

AB - Objectives: While critical value procedures have been adopted in most areas of the clinical laboratory, their use in transfusion medicine has not been reviewed in detail. The results of this study present a comprehensive overview of critical value reporting and communication practices in transfusion medicine in the United States. Methods: A web-based survey was developed to collect data on the prevalence of critical value procedures and practices of communicating results. The survey was distributed via email to US hospital-based blood banks. Results: Of 123 facilities surveyed, 84 (68.3%) blood banks had a critical value procedure. From a panel of 23 common blood bank results, nine results were selected by more than 70% of facilities as either a critical value or requiring rapid communication as defined by an alternate procedure. Conclusions: There was overlap among results communicated by facilities with and without a critical value procedure. The most frequently communicated results, such as incompatible crossmatch for RBC units issued uncrossmatched, delay in finding compatible blood due to a clinically significant antibody, and transfusion reaction evaluation suggestive of a serious adverse event, addressed scenarios associated with the leading reported causes of transfusion-related fatalities.

KW - Blood bank

KW - Communication

KW - Critical values

KW - Results

KW - Transfusion

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026419330&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026419330&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/ajcp/aqx025

DO - 10.1093/ajcp/aqx025

M3 - Article

C2 - 28371931

AN - SCOPUS:85026419330

VL - 147

SP - 492

EP - 499

JO - American Journal of Clinical Pathology

JF - American Journal of Clinical Pathology

SN - 0002-9173

IS - 5

ER -