急诊科止血测试:叙述性综述。

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY
Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-19 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1787661
Henri Thonon, Michael Van Nieuwenhove, Jecko Thachil, Giuseppe Lippi, Michael Hardy, François Mullier
{"title":"急诊科止血测试:叙述性综述。","authors":"Henri Thonon, Michael Van Nieuwenhove, Jecko Thachil, Giuseppe Lippi, Michael Hardy, François Mullier","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1787661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Routine laboratory screening is typically performed at initial evaluation of the vast majority of presentations to the emergency department (ED). These laboratory results are crucial to the diagnostic process, as they may influence up to 70% of clinical decisions. However, despite the usefulness of biological assessments, many tests performed are inappropriate or of doubtful clinical relevance. This overutilization rate of laboratory testing in hospitals, which represents a significant medical-economic burden, ranges from 20 to 67%, with coagulation tests at the top of the list. While reviews frequently focus on nonintensive care units, there are few published assessments of emergency-specific interventions or guidelines/guidance to date. The aim of this review is to highlight current recommendations for hemostasis evaluation in the emergency setting with a specific analysis of common situations leading to ED admissions, such as suspected venous thrombosis or severe bleeding. We revisit the evidence related to the assessment of patient's hemostatic capacity based on comprehensive history taking and physical examination as well as best practice recommendations for blood sample collection to ensure the reliability of results. This review also includes an examination of various currently available point of care tests and a comprehensive discussion on indications, limitations, and interpretation of these tests.</p>","PeriodicalId":21673,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis","volume":" ","pages":"506-523"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hemostasis Testing in the Emergency Department: A Narrative Review.\",\"authors\":\"Henri Thonon, Michael Van Nieuwenhove, Jecko Thachil, Giuseppe Lippi, Michael Hardy, François Mullier\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0044-1787661\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Routine laboratory screening is typically performed at initial evaluation of the vast majority of presentations to the emergency department (ED). These laboratory results are crucial to the diagnostic process, as they may influence up to 70% of clinical decisions. However, despite the usefulness of biological assessments, many tests performed are inappropriate or of doubtful clinical relevance. This overutilization rate of laboratory testing in hospitals, which represents a significant medical-economic burden, ranges from 20 to 67%, with coagulation tests at the top of the list. While reviews frequently focus on nonintensive care units, there are few published assessments of emergency-specific interventions or guidelines/guidance to date. The aim of this review is to highlight current recommendations for hemostasis evaluation in the emergency setting with a specific analysis of common situations leading to ED admissions, such as suspected venous thrombosis or severe bleeding. We revisit the evidence related to the assessment of patient's hemostatic capacity based on comprehensive history taking and physical examination as well as best practice recommendations for blood sample collection to ensure the reliability of results. This review also includes an examination of various currently available point of care tests and a comprehensive discussion on indications, limitations, and interpretation of these tests.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"506-523\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1787661\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1787661","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

常规实验室筛查通常是在对急诊科(ED)的绝大多数病人进行初步评估时进行的。这些化验结果对诊断过程至关重要,因为它们可能影响多达 70% 的临床决策。然而,尽管生物评估很有用,但许多化验结果并不恰当或临床相关性存疑。医院实验室检测的过度使用率从 20% 到 67%不等,其中以凝血检测居首位,造成了巨大的医疗经济负担。尽管综述经常关注非重症监护病房,但迄今为止,针对急诊的干预措施或指南/指导的评估却鲜有发表。本综述旨在强调急诊环境中止血评估的当前建议,并对导致急诊入院的常见情况(如疑似静脉血栓或严重出血)进行具体分析。我们重新审视了基于全面病史采集和体格检查评估患者止血能力的相关证据,以及采集血样以确保结果可靠性的最佳实践建议。本综述还包括对目前可用的各种护理点检测的检查,以及对这些检测的适应症、局限性和解释的全面讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hemostasis Testing in the Emergency Department: A Narrative Review.

Routine laboratory screening is typically performed at initial evaluation of the vast majority of presentations to the emergency department (ED). These laboratory results are crucial to the diagnostic process, as they may influence up to 70% of clinical decisions. However, despite the usefulness of biological assessments, many tests performed are inappropriate or of doubtful clinical relevance. This overutilization rate of laboratory testing in hospitals, which represents a significant medical-economic burden, ranges from 20 to 67%, with coagulation tests at the top of the list. While reviews frequently focus on nonintensive care units, there are few published assessments of emergency-specific interventions or guidelines/guidance to date. The aim of this review is to highlight current recommendations for hemostasis evaluation in the emergency setting with a specific analysis of common situations leading to ED admissions, such as suspected venous thrombosis or severe bleeding. We revisit the evidence related to the assessment of patient's hemostatic capacity based on comprehensive history taking and physical examination as well as best practice recommendations for blood sample collection to ensure the reliability of results. This review also includes an examination of various currently available point of care tests and a comprehensive discussion on indications, limitations, and interpretation of these tests.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis
Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
21.10%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis is a topic driven review journal that focuses on all issues relating to hemostatic and thrombotic disorders. As one of the premiere review journals in the field, Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis serves as a comprehensive forum for important advances in clinical and laboratory diagnosis and therapeutic interventions. The journal also publishes peer reviewed original research papers. Seminars offers an informed perspective on today''s pivotal issues, including hemophilia A & B, thrombophilia, gene therapy, venous and arterial thrombosis, von Willebrand disease, vascular disorders and thromboembolic diseases. Attention is also given to the latest developments in pharmaceutical drugs along with treatment and current management techniques. The journal also frequently publishes sponsored supplements to further highlight emerging trends in the field.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信