Physician perspectives about the diagnosis and management of acute chest syndrome.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY
Transfusion Pub Date : 2024-10-07 DOI:10.1111/trf.18034
Neha Bhasin, Dana Marie LeBlanc, Sean Yates, Quentin Eichbaum, An Pham, Deva Sharma, Li Zhang, Elliott P Vichinsky, Ravi Sarode
{"title":"Physician perspectives about the diagnosis and management of acute chest syndrome.","authors":"Neha Bhasin, Dana Marie LeBlanc, Sean Yates, Quentin Eichbaum, An Pham, Deva Sharma, Li Zhang, Elliott P Vichinsky, Ravi Sarode","doi":"10.1111/trf.18034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acute chest syndrome (ACS) is the leading cause of mortality, accounting for 25% of all deaths among individuals with sickle cell disease (SCD). There is a lack of evidence-based laboratory and clinical risk stratification guidelines for the diagnosis and management of ACS.</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>To better understand physician practices for the management of ACS in the United States, we created an ACS Working Group including hematology and transfusion medicine physicians from four different SCD treatment centers in the United States. The working group created a physician survey that included physician demographics and ACS diagnostic criteria that they had to rate. The survey also included three case scenarios to assess physician attitudes about the management of ACS. Management options included supportive and preventive strategies in addition to transfusion therapy options.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 455 physicians who received the survey, 195 responded (response rate = 43%). The respondents were primarily hematology/oncology physicians. The responses showed wide variability among physicians in how diagnostic criteria for ACS are used and how physicians risk-stratify ACS patients in their practice. The responses also reflected variability in the use of transfusions for ACS.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Based on our results, we conclude that ACS is diagnosed and managed inconsistently among expert physicians, especially in their transfusion practices due to a lack of consensus on risk stratification criteria. Our data suggest an urgent need for well-designed prospective studies to provide evidence-based guidelines and minimize management variability among physicians who care for individuals with SCD and ACS.</p>","PeriodicalId":23266,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.18034","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Acute chest syndrome (ACS) is the leading cause of mortality, accounting for 25% of all deaths among individuals with sickle cell disease (SCD). There is a lack of evidence-based laboratory and clinical risk stratification guidelines for the diagnosis and management of ACS.

Study design and methods: To better understand physician practices for the management of ACS in the United States, we created an ACS Working Group including hematology and transfusion medicine physicians from four different SCD treatment centers in the United States. The working group created a physician survey that included physician demographics and ACS diagnostic criteria that they had to rate. The survey also included three case scenarios to assess physician attitudes about the management of ACS. Management options included supportive and preventive strategies in addition to transfusion therapy options.

Results: Out of 455 physicians who received the survey, 195 responded (response rate = 43%). The respondents were primarily hematology/oncology physicians. The responses showed wide variability among physicians in how diagnostic criteria for ACS are used and how physicians risk-stratify ACS patients in their practice. The responses also reflected variability in the use of transfusions for ACS.

Discussion: Based on our results, we conclude that ACS is diagnosed and managed inconsistently among expert physicians, especially in their transfusion practices due to a lack of consensus on risk stratification criteria. Our data suggest an urgent need for well-designed prospective studies to provide evidence-based guidelines and minimize management variability among physicians who care for individuals with SCD and ACS.

医生对急性胸部综合征诊断和管理的看法。
背景:急性胸部综合征(ACS)是导致死亡的主要原因,占镰状细胞病(SCD)患者死亡总数的 25%。在诊断和管理 ACS 方面缺乏循证实验室和临床风险分层指南:为了更好地了解美国医生在处理 ACS 方面的做法,我们成立了一个 ACS 工作组,成员包括来自美国四个不同 SCD 治疗中心的血液科和输血科医生。工作组制作了一份医生调查表,其中包括医生的人口统计学特征和 ACS 诊断标准,并要求他们对这些标准进行评分。调查还包括三个病例情景,以评估医生对 ACS 管理的态度。除输血治疗方案外,管理方案还包括支持性和预防性策略:在收到调查问卷的 455 名医生中,有 195 名做出了回复(回复率 = 43%)。受访者主要是血液/肿瘤科医生。调查结果显示,医生之间在如何使用 ACS 诊断标准以及如何在实践中对 ACS 患者进行风险分级方面存在很大差异。答复还反映出 ACS 输血使用方面的差异:讨论:根据我们的研究结果,我们得出结论:由于对风险分层标准缺乏共识,专家医师对 ACS 的诊断和管理并不一致,尤其是在输血实践中。我们的数据表明,迫切需要设计完善的前瞻性研究来提供循证指南,并最大限度地减少医生在治疗 SCD 和 ACS 患者时的管理差异。
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
Transfusion
Transfusion 医学-血液学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
20.70%
发文量
426
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: TRANSFUSION is the foremost publication in the world for new information regarding transfusion medicine. Written by and for members of AABB and other health-care workers, TRANSFUSION reports on the latest technical advances, discusses opposing viewpoints regarding controversial issues, and presents key conference proceedings. In addition to blood banking and transfusion medicine topics, TRANSFUSION presents submissions concerning patient blood management, tissue transplantation and hematopoietic, cellular, and gene therapies.
×
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