A Potential Indicator for Assessing Patient Blood Management Standard Implementation
(1) Background: Patient blood management (PBM) program as a multidisciplinary practice and a standard of care for the anemic surgical patient has an increasingly important role in reducing transfusions and optimizing both clinical outcomes and costs. Documented success of PBM implementation is not s...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-08-01
|
| Series: | Healthcare |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/11/16/2233 |
| _version_ | 1797584625568055296 |
|---|---|
| author | Andrea Kazamer Radu Ilinca Stefan Vesa Laszlo Lorenzovici Iulia-Ioana Stanescu-Spinu Ionela Ganea Maria Greabu Daniela Miricescu Andras Biczo Daniela Ionescu |
| author_facet | Andrea Kazamer Radu Ilinca Stefan Vesa Laszlo Lorenzovici Iulia-Ioana Stanescu-Spinu Ionela Ganea Maria Greabu Daniela Miricescu Andras Biczo Daniela Ionescu |
| author_sort | Andrea Kazamer |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | (1) Background: Patient blood management (PBM) program as a multidisciplinary practice and a standard of care for the anemic surgical patient has an increasingly important role in reducing transfusions and optimizing both clinical outcomes and costs. Documented success of PBM implementation is not sufficient for implementation of recommendations and correct use at hospital level. The primary objective of our study was to define a composite patient blood management process safety index—Safety Index in PBM (SIPBM)—that measures the impact of screening and treating anemic patients on the efficiency and effectiveness of the patient care process undergoing elective surgery. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective comparative study in a tertiary hospital by collecting data and analyzing the Safety Index in PBM (SIPBM) in patients undergoing major elective surgical procedures. (3) Results: The percentage of patients from the total of 354 patients (178 in 2019 and 176 in 2022) included in the study who benefited from preoperative iron treatment increased in 2022 compared to 2019 from 27.40% to 36.71%. The median value of the SIPBM was 1.00 in both periods analyzed, although there is a significant difference between the two periods (<i>p</i> < 0.005), in favor of 2022. (4) Conclusions: Measuring the effectiveness of PBM implementation and providing ongoing feedback through the Safety Index in PBM (SIPBM) increases the degree to which opportunities to improve the PBM process are identified. The study represents a first step for future actions and baselines to develop tools to measure the safety and impact of the patient blood management process in the surgical field. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T23:54:18Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5973d418bd444ac7be1ca3727418b014 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2227-9032 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T23:54:18Z |
| publishDate | 2023-08-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Healthcare |
| spelling | doaj.art-5973d418bd444ac7be1ca3727418b0142023-11-19T01:17:41ZengMDPI AGHealthcare2227-90322023-08-011116223310.3390/healthcare11162233A Potential Indicator for Assessing Patient Blood Management Standard ImplementationAndrea Kazamer0Radu Ilinca1Stefan Vesa2Laszlo Lorenzovici3Iulia-Ioana Stanescu-Spinu4Ionela Ganea5Maria Greabu6Daniela Miricescu7Andras Biczo8Daniela Ionescu9CREST Association, 48 Alexandru Odobescu Street, 440069 Satu Mare, RomaniaDiscipline of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, Faculty of Dentistry, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 4-6 Eforie Street, 050037 Bucharest, RomaniaDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care I, Faculty of Medicine, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 8 Victor Babes Street, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, RomaniaFaculty of Technical and Human Sciences, Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania, 4 Matei Corvin Street, 400112 Cluj-Napoca, RomaniaDiscipline of Biochemistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 8 Eroii Sanitari Street, 050474 Bucharest, RomaniaDepartment of Modern Languages, Faculty of Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 8 Eroii Sanitari Street, 050474 Bucharest, RomaniaDiscipline of Biochemistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 8 Eroii Sanitari Street, 050474 Bucharest, RomaniaDiscipline of Biochemistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 8 Eroii Sanitari Street, 050474 Bucharest, RomaniaDepartment Hamm 2 Manufacturing and Production Technology, Hamm-Lippstadt University of Applied Sciences, Allee 76-78, D-59063 Hamm, GermanyDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care I, Faculty of Medicine, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 8 Victor Babes Street, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania(1) Background: Patient blood management (PBM) program as a multidisciplinary practice and a standard of care for the anemic surgical patient has an increasingly important role in reducing transfusions and optimizing both clinical outcomes and costs. Documented success of PBM implementation is not sufficient for implementation of recommendations and correct use at hospital level. The primary objective of our study was to define a composite patient blood management process safety index—Safety Index in PBM (SIPBM)—that measures the impact of screening and treating anemic patients on the efficiency and effectiveness of the patient care process undergoing elective surgery. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective comparative study in a tertiary hospital by collecting data and analyzing the Safety Index in PBM (SIPBM) in patients undergoing major elective surgical procedures. (3) Results: The percentage of patients from the total of 354 patients (178 in 2019 and 176 in 2022) included in the study who benefited from preoperative iron treatment increased in 2022 compared to 2019 from 27.40% to 36.71%. The median value of the SIPBM was 1.00 in both periods analyzed, although there is a significant difference between the two periods (<i>p</i> < 0.005), in favor of 2022. (4) Conclusions: Measuring the effectiveness of PBM implementation and providing ongoing feedback through the Safety Index in PBM (SIPBM) increases the degree to which opportunities to improve the PBM process are identified. The study represents a first step for future actions and baselines to develop tools to measure the safety and impact of the patient blood management process in the surgical field.https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/11/16/2233patient safetyindicatorpatient blood managementSafety Index in PBM |
| spellingShingle | Andrea Kazamer Radu Ilinca Stefan Vesa Laszlo Lorenzovici Iulia-Ioana Stanescu-Spinu Ionela Ganea Maria Greabu Daniela Miricescu Andras Biczo Daniela Ionescu A Potential Indicator for Assessing Patient Blood Management Standard Implementation Healthcare patient safety indicator patient blood management Safety Index in PBM |
| title | A Potential Indicator for Assessing Patient Blood Management Standard Implementation |
| title_full | A Potential Indicator for Assessing Patient Blood Management Standard Implementation |
| title_fullStr | A Potential Indicator for Assessing Patient Blood Management Standard Implementation |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Potential Indicator for Assessing Patient Blood Management Standard Implementation |
| title_short | A Potential Indicator for Assessing Patient Blood Management Standard Implementation |
| title_sort | potential indicator for assessing patient blood management standard implementation |
| topic | patient safety indicator patient blood management Safety Index in PBM |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/11/16/2233 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT andreakazamer apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT raduilinca apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT stefanvesa apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT laszlolorenzovici apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT iuliaioanastanescuspinu apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT ionelaganea apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT mariagreabu apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT danielamiricescu apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT andrasbiczo apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT danielaionescu apotentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT andreakazamer potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT raduilinca potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT stefanvesa potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT laszlolorenzovici potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT iuliaioanastanescuspinu potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT ionelaganea potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT mariagreabu potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT danielamiricescu potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT andrasbiczo potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation AT danielaionescu potentialindicatorforassessingpatientbloodmanagementstandardimplementation |