Patient Blood Management and Its Role in Supporting Blood Supply

Outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and ethics in patient blood management

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

In this narrative review, we evaluate the recent evidence for benefits, cost-effectiveness, and ethical considerations of patient blood management (PBM) programs.

RECENT FINDINGS

PBM programs are able to reduce the amount of red blood cell transfusion by 20-40% and the risk of reoperation. Lower morbidity and mortality due to PBM implementation were only shown in retrospective studies with a before-and-after design but not in randomized controlled trials. PBM is very likely to be cost-effective when reduced blood transfusion can be accomplished through low-cost interventions, such as administration of oral iron or antifibrinolytics. Further, cost-efficacy can also be achieved by reducing postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay. Of note, cost-efficacy of PBM interventions might be better in patients at high bleeding risk. Finally, aiming to improve patient's outcome while minimizing transfusion-induced complications, PBM seems highly ethical.

SUMMARY

PBM is an important concept as it promotes the rational use of allogeneic blood products and reduces transfusion and wastage of precious and limited blood products.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Blood Transfusion among Hospitalized Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Background and Objectives: Hematological disorders, especially chronic anemia and coagulation disorders, are common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Severe anemia is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in this special group of patients and is also responsible for decreased hope and quality of life. Despite the use of appropriate iron therapy and erythropoietin-stimulating agents, red blood cell transfusion is occasionally required, usually in the setting of acute bleeding or for correction of perioperative anemia. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the progression of chronic diseases and worsened the outcomes for patients with nephrological conditions. As a precautionary measure against infections, patients' access to hospitalization for their procedures has been reduced and their chronic complications, including hematological abnormalities, have gotten out of control. Materials and Methods: Our retrospective observational study was designed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on blood transfusion for the patients with chronic kidney disease hospitalized in our emergency county medical unit, over a period of four years (2019-2022) who were admitted or at least referred for evaluation to the Nephrology department. We also followed the measures adopted to ensure the necessary blood products during this time. Results: Between 2190-2022, a total of 24,096 hospitalized patients were transfused at the Emergency County Clinical Hospital in Constanta, Romania. Meanwhile, in the nephrology and other medical or surgical wards of our medical unit, 1590 CKD patients were transfused with different blood derivatives. During the pandemic years, as expected, the number of transfused patients and transfused blood units decreased by 4% and 7%, respectively, in comparison with the pre-pandemic year, 2019. Unlike the general trend of transfusion activity, more patients with CKD transfused in 2022 (580) than before the pandemic (414 in 2019), and the number of blood units was higher in 2022 than in 2019 for red blood products and plasma. Between 2020-2022, from the total number of transfused patients in our study, 254 with CKD patients (16%) and 798 non-CKD (4%) died in-hospital. Conclusions: The adaptive strategies implemented to ensure the necessary blood products in the hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic mainly included restrictive transfusion and limitation of elective surgical procedures. The subject matter of the article is important as blood shortages are a problem that healthcare workers may encounter in future pandemics.

Removing the barriers to prehospital blood: A roadmap to success

ABSTRACT

This review describes the necessity, evolution, and current state of prehospital blood programs in the United States. Less than 1% of 9-1-1 ground emergency medical service agencies have been able to successfully implement prehospital blood transfusions as part of a resuscitation strategy for patients in hemorrhagic shock despite estimates that annually between 54,000 and 900,000 patients may benefit from its use. The use of prehospital blood transfusions as a tool for managing hemorrhagic shock has barriers to overcome to ensure it becomes widely available to patients throughout the United States. Barriers include (1) current state Emergency Medical Services clinicians' scope of practice limitations; (2) program costs and reimbursement of blood products; (3) no centralized data collection process for prehospital hemorrhagic shock and patient outcomes; (4) collaboration between prehospital agencies, blood suppliers, and hospital clinicians and transfusion service activities. The following article identifies barriers and a proposed roadmap to reduce death due to prehospital hemorrhage.