Evaluation of Blood Transfusion Request form: The Experience in a Tertiary Health Facility in Jos, Nigeria

Jatau ED, Iheanacho Cu, Okeke Cn, Zakari A, Bangalu DY, Damulak Od, Egesie OJ
{"title":"Evaluation of Blood Transfusion Request form: The Experience in a Tertiary Health Facility in Jos, Nigeria","authors":"Jatau ED, Iheanacho Cu, Okeke Cn, Zakari A, Bangalu DY, Damulak Od, Egesie OJ","doi":"10.9734/ibrr/2024/v15i2336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: There is a thin line between a safe blood transfusion and transfusion-related fatality hence the need to be diligent in every aspect of the blood transfusion process. Appropriate and complete documentation on a blood transfusion request form is one of the most important preanalytic activities serving as a communication tool between the clinician and the blood transfusion laboratory personnel.\nAims: To evaluate compliance with appropriate and complete documentation of information on our blood transfusion request forms for a reliable preanalytic process towards an efficient blood transfusion service.\nStudy Design: It is a retrospective study.\nPlace and Duration of Study: Blood Bank of the Jos University Teaching Hospital between January to December 2023.\nMethodology: Six thousand, three hundred and sixty (6360) blood transfusion request forms from the Jos University Teaching Hospital Blood bank were evaluated for complete or incomplete documentation retrospectively and results were presented in frequencies and percentages.\nResults: There was 100% compliance in filling in the patients' surnames and other names as well as the laboratory number and blood groups of the patients while only 4779 (75.14%) filled in the patients' ages with 1416(22.26%) using the prefix of adult(ad) while 165(2.59%) fail to document the patients' age. There were 2829 (44.48%) males with 3522 (55.38%) females while no sex was indicated in 9 of the reviewed forms. Obstetrics history has the least cumulated documented response of 0.38% while a significant 1008 (15.85%) did not indicate either blood grouping or blood grouping with cross-match request.\nConclusion: Appropriate and complete documentation of information on blood transfusion request forms is a problem among clinicians and will require continuous education on its importance, periodic auditing, provision of electronic data system and attitudinal change for a better blood transfusion compatibility service.","PeriodicalId":249518,"journal":{"name":"International Blood Research & Reviews","volume":" 932","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Blood Research & Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9734/ibrr/2024/v15i2336","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is a thin line between a safe blood transfusion and transfusion-related fatality hence the need to be diligent in every aspect of the blood transfusion process. Appropriate and complete documentation on a blood transfusion request form is one of the most important preanalytic activities serving as a communication tool between the clinician and the blood transfusion laboratory personnel. Aims: To evaluate compliance with appropriate and complete documentation of information on our blood transfusion request forms for a reliable preanalytic process towards an efficient blood transfusion service. Study Design: It is a retrospective study. Place and Duration of Study: Blood Bank of the Jos University Teaching Hospital between January to December 2023. Methodology: Six thousand, three hundred and sixty (6360) blood transfusion request forms from the Jos University Teaching Hospital Blood bank were evaluated for complete or incomplete documentation retrospectively and results were presented in frequencies and percentages. Results: There was 100% compliance in filling in the patients' surnames and other names as well as the laboratory number and blood groups of the patients while only 4779 (75.14%) filled in the patients' ages with 1416(22.26%) using the prefix of adult(ad) while 165(2.59%) fail to document the patients' age. There were 2829 (44.48%) males with 3522 (55.38%) females while no sex was indicated in 9 of the reviewed forms. Obstetrics history has the least cumulated documented response of 0.38% while a significant 1008 (15.85%) did not indicate either blood grouping or blood grouping with cross-match request. Conclusion: Appropriate and complete documentation of information on blood transfusion request forms is a problem among clinicians and will require continuous education on its importance, periodic auditing, provision of electronic data system and attitudinal change for a better blood transfusion compatibility service.
输血申请表的评估:尼日利亚乔斯一家三级医疗机构的经验
背景:安全输血与输血相关死亡之间只有一线之隔,因此在输血过程的每个环节都必须恪尽职守。输血申请表上适当而完整的记录是分析前最重要的活动之一,是临床医生和输血实验室人员之间的沟通工具。研究目的:评估输血申请表上适当而完整的信息记录的合规性,以实现可靠的分析前流程,提供高效的输血服务:这是一项回顾性研究:研究地点和时间:乔斯大学教学医院血库,时间为 2023 年 1 月至 12 月:对乔斯大学教学医院血库的六千三百六十(6360)份输血申请表进行了回顾性评估,看是否有完整或不完整的记录,结果以频率和百分比表示:在填写病人的姓氏和其他名称以及化验室编号和血型方面,合格率为 100%,但只有 4779 人(75.14%)填写了病人的年龄,其中 1416 人(22.26%)使用了成人(ad)前缀,165 人(2.59%)没有记录病人的年龄。有 2829 份(44.48%)男性病历和 3522 份(55.38%)女性病历,有 9 份病历未填写性别。产科病史的累计记录率最低,仅为 0.38%,而有 1008 份(15.85%)未记录血型或交叉配血要求的血型:结论:临床医生对输血申请表上的信息进行适当和完整的记录是一个问题,需要对其重要性进行持续教育、定期审核、提供电子数据系统和改变态度,以提供更好的输血相容性服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信