Retrospective study showed that blood sampling errors risked children's well-being and safety in a Swedish paediatric tertiary care

Direct costs of blood drawings with pre-analytical errors in tertiary paediatric hospital care

BACKGROUND

Blood drawings is a common hospital procedure involving laboratory and clinical disciplines that is important for the diagnosis and management of illnesses in children. Blood drawings with pre-analytical error (PAE) can lead to increased costs for hospitals and healthcare organisations. The direct cost of blood drawings after a PAE is not fully understood in paediatric hospital care.

AIM

The aim of this study was to estimate the average direct cost of PAE per year and per 10,000 blood drawings in tertiary paediatric care.

METHODS

A cost analysis using a bottom-up approach was conducted on the basis of combined information from the hospital's laboratory register for the period 2013-2014 and clinical in-ward observations at a tertiary children's referral hospital in Sweden, the Astrid Lindgren Children's Hospital. For the analysis, we hypothesised the re-collection of all blood drawings with PAE and included the average costs of the sampling materials, the time of the healthcare personnel, the laboratory analyses, and in-ward premises based on the time spent on the blood sampling procedure.

RESULTS

The annual cost of PAE was estimated to be 74,267 euros per 54,040 blood drawings, which corresponds to 13,756 euros per 10,000 blood drawings or 1.5 euros per draw. The personnel cost represented 60.1% (45,261 euros per year) of the cost due to PAE, followed by costs for hospitalisation (25.2%), laboratory analyses (8.1%), and materials (5.7%).

CONCLUSION

PAEs lead to substantial increases in the costs in tertiary paediatric hospital care. If these PAEs can be avoided, costs related to the re-collection of blood drawings with PAE may be re-allocated to other health-promoting activities for children visiting hospital institutions.

Analysis of the Six Sigma Principle in Pre-analytical Quality for Hematological Specimens

Introduction Blood tests are essential for detecting and treating hospitalized individuals with diseases. Laboratory blood tests provide doctors with critical information required to treat their patient's illnesses. The most common sources of error in clinical laboratories are pre-analytical errors. Although quality control measures can remediate analytical errors, there is a requirement for stringent quality checks in the pre-analytical sector as these activities are performed outside of the laboratory. Pre-analytical errors when combined with the sigma value can reflect a better picture as the sigma value represents the laboratory's performance.  Aim In this study, six sigma and the Pareto principle were utilized to assess pre-analytical quality indicators for evaluating the performance of a clinical hematology laboratory.  Methodology  This is a retrospective observational study conducted from 2015 to 2023 (for a period of eight years). Information about the frequency of pre-analytical errors was retrieved from the hematology section of the central diagnostic research laboratory information system and the data was entered into an MS Excel sheet and data was evaluated utilizing SPSS version 23 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results In the current research, total of 15 pre-analytical errors were noted. Out of the total 15 pre-analytical errors studied, 55.4% of pre-analytical errors were noted among which 80% errors were due to lack of mention of sample type or received time and 20% of errors were attributed to no mention of diagnosis in requisition forms. The next most common errors noted were insufficient samples (8.26%) followed by absence of physician's signature (7%), incomplete request form (5.4%), age (4.2%), unique hospital identification (UHID) number (3.7%), clotted samples and transportation of the samples (3.6%), date and incorrect vials (2.6%). Gender (0.95%), hemolysed (0.85%), and lipemic samples (0.45%). Hemolysed and lipemic samples had a sigma value of 4.4 and 4.6, respectively, whereas gender and age had a sigma value of 4.3 and 3.8, inadequate sample for testing and an incorrect anticoagulant to blood ratio had a sigma value of 3.6, indicating that sample collection has to be improved as the inverse relationship is noted between sigma value and laboratory performance. Conclusion Pareto chart and sigma value can help recognize most common pre-analytical errors, which consequently will help to prevent further recurrence of pre-analytical errors. Adequate training with regard to best practices in phlebotomy for interns, clinicians and technicians must be provided to decrease quantitative errors, which will further enhance total quality management in the laboratory.

Nurses' experiences of blood sample collection from children: a qualitative study from Swedish paediatric hospital care

Background

Nurses play an active role in supporting the children with the blood sampling experience. Unfortunately, the blood sampling collection procedure is often affected by pre-analytical errors, leading to consequences such as delayed diagnosis as well as repeated sampling. Moreover, children state that needle procedures are the worst experience of their hospital stay. The nurses’ experiences of errors occurring during blood sample collection is unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study therefore was to describe paediatric nurses’ experiences of blood sampling collections from children.

Method

We used a qualitative study design with a (reflexive) thematic analysis (TA) method described by Braun and Clarke. Three focus group interviews were conducted, with 19 nurses collected by purposeful sampling from Sweden working at two different paediatric hospitals, focusing on their experiences of the blood sample collection procedure.

Results

From the three focus group interviews we analysed patterns and meanings of the following main theme Paediatric blood sampling is a challenge for the nurses and the four subthemes Nurses’ feelings of frustration with unsuccessful samplings, Nurses believe in team work, Venous blood sampling was experienced as the best option, and Nurses’ thoughts and needs regarding skills development in paediatric blood sampling.

Conclusion

The narrative results of this study illustrate that nurses working in paediatric hospital care face a big challenge in blood sampling collection from children. The nurses felt frustrated due to unsuccessful blood samplings and frequently could not understand why pre-analytical errors occurred. Nevertheless, they felt strengthened by colleagues in their team and shared feelings of responsibility to help each other with this complex procedure. The implications of this study are that paediatric hospital care needs to focus on improving guidelines for and increasing competence in blood sampling children and helping nurses to understand why samplings may be unsuccessful and how this can be avoided.

Capillary blood sampling increases the risk of preanalytical errors in pediatric hospital care: Observational clinical study

PURPOSE

The blood sampling procedure is complex and prone to failure, as reflected by preanalytical errors in pediatric hospital care. The primary aim was to evaluate if the risk of preanalytical errors was higher with capillary blood sampling than with venous blood sampling, and secondary, explore specific factors associated with preanalytical errors, both overall and stratified by capillary and venous blood sampling.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This observational pediatric hospital study collected outcomes from medical records and blood sampling surveys from year 2014 to 2016. The risk of preanalytical errors was analyzed with adjusted-odds ratio (adj-OR) by multivariable logistic regression with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Overall, 128 (13%) preanalytical errors were identified among 951 blood samples. The proportion and adj-OR of errors was significantly higher in capillary compared with venous blood samples, 72 (20%) of 354 versus 56 (9.4%) of 597, p = .001, adj-OR 2.88 (CI 1.79-4.64). Blood collection with multiple sample tubes was significantly associated with increased risk of preanalytical errors (n = 97 of 601, 16%), while log weight (kg) significantly decreased the risk of preanalytical errors adj-OR 0.66 (CI 0.50-0.86), indicating a protective effect of increasing weight. However, stratified analyses indicated a protective effect of increasing log weight for venous blood sampling adj-OR 0.52 (CI 0.38-0.72), but not capillary blood sampling, adj-OR 1.08 (CI 0.76-1.55).

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that capillary blood sampling collection increases the risk of preanalytical errors. Further, a child's increasing body weight reduced the risk of preanalytical errors, while multiple sample tube collections significantly increased the risk of preanalytical errors.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This new information may help nurses improve their knowledge concerning blood sampling collection in pediatrics. Altogether, this study also indicates that implementing more venous blood sampling and improve the cases of capillary sampling could reduce the number of preanalytical errors in pediatric hospitals.