成人重症监护病房的小容量血液样本采集管:快速操作指南。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-21 DOI:10.1111/aas.14497
Jeannie Callum, Zbignew Putowski, Waleed Alhazzani, Emilie Belley-Cote, Morten Hylander Møller, Nicola Curry, Zainab Al Duhailib, Mark Fung, Louise Giocobbo, Anders Granholm, Vernon Louw, Patrick Maybohm, Marcella Muller, Nathan Nielsen, Curtis Oleschuk, Sheharyar Raza, Elizabeth Scruth, Deborah Siegal, Simon J Stanworth, Alexander P J Vlaar, Micheline White, Simon Oczkowski
{"title":"成人重症监护病房的小容量血液样本采集管:快速操作指南。","authors":"Jeannie Callum, Zbignew Putowski, Waleed Alhazzani, Emilie Belley-Cote, Morten Hylander Møller, Nicola Curry, Zainab Al Duhailib, Mark Fung, Louise Giocobbo, Anders Granholm, Vernon Louw, Patrick Maybohm, Marcella Muller, Nathan Nielsen, Curtis Oleschuk, Sheharyar Raza, Elizabeth Scruth, Deborah Siegal, Simon J Stanworth, Alexander P J Vlaar, Micheline White, Simon Oczkowski","doi":"10.1111/aas.14497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This Intensive Care Medicine Rapid Practice Guideline (ICM-RPG) provides an evidence-based recommendation to address the question: in adult patients in intensive care units (ICUs), should we use small-volume or conventional blood collection tubes?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 23 panelists in 8 countries and assessed and managed financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the Guidelines in Intensive Care, Development, and Evaluation (GUIDE) group. We conducted a systematic review, including evidence from observational and randomized studies. Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 8 studies (1 cluster and 2 patient-level randomized trials; 5 observational studies) comparing small-volume to conventional tubes. We had high certainty evidence that small-volume tubes reduce daily and cumulative blood sampling volume; and moderate certainty evidence that they reduce the risk of transfusion and mean number of red blood cell units transfused, but these estimates were limited by imprecision. We had high certainty that small-volume tubes have a similar rate of specimens with insufficient quantity. The panel considered that the desirable effects of small-volume tubes outweigh the undesirable effects, are less wasteful of resources, and are feasible, as demonstrated by successful implementation across multiple countries, although there are upfront implementation costs to validate small-volume tubes on laboratory instrumentation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This ICM-RPG panel made a strong recommendation for the use of small-volume sample collection tubes in adult ICUs based on overall moderate certainty evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"1319-1326"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Small-volume blood sample collection tubes in adult intensive care units: A rapid practice guideline.\",\"authors\":\"Jeannie Callum, Zbignew Putowski, Waleed Alhazzani, Emilie Belley-Cote, Morten Hylander Møller, Nicola Curry, Zainab Al Duhailib, Mark Fung, Louise Giocobbo, Anders Granholm, Vernon Louw, Patrick Maybohm, Marcella Muller, Nathan Nielsen, Curtis Oleschuk, Sheharyar Raza, Elizabeth Scruth, Deborah Siegal, Simon J Stanworth, Alexander P J Vlaar, Micheline White, Simon Oczkowski\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.14497\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This Intensive Care Medicine Rapid Practice Guideline (ICM-RPG) provides an evidence-based recommendation to address the question: in adult patients in intensive care units (ICUs), should we use small-volume or conventional blood collection tubes?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 23 panelists in 8 countries and assessed and managed financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the Guidelines in Intensive Care, Development, and Evaluation (GUIDE) group. We conducted a systematic review, including evidence from observational and randomized studies. Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 8 studies (1 cluster and 2 patient-level randomized trials; 5 observational studies) comparing small-volume to conventional tubes. We had high certainty evidence that small-volume tubes reduce daily and cumulative blood sampling volume; and moderate certainty evidence that they reduce the risk of transfusion and mean number of red blood cell units transfused, but these estimates were limited by imprecision. We had high certainty that small-volume tubes have a similar rate of specimens with insufficient quantity. The panel considered that the desirable effects of small-volume tubes outweigh the undesirable effects, are less wasteful of resources, and are feasible, as demonstrated by successful implementation across multiple countries, although there are upfront implementation costs to validate small-volume tubes on laboratory instrumentation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This ICM-RPG panel made a strong recommendation for the use of small-volume sample collection tubes in adult ICUs based on overall moderate certainty evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1319-1326\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14497\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14497","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本《重症监护医学快速实践指南》(ICM-RPG)针对以下问题提供了循证建议:对于重症监护病房(ICU)的成人患者,我们应该使用小容量采血管还是常规采血管?我们纳入了来自 8 个国家的 23 位专家组成员,并评估和管理了经济和智力利益冲突。重症监护指南、开发和评估(GUIDE)小组提供了方法学支持。我们进行了系统性回顾,包括观察性研究和随机研究的证据。我们采用建议、评估、发展和评价分级法(GRADE)评估了证据的确定性,并利用 "从证据到决定 "框架提出了建议:我们确定了 8 项比较小容量输液管和传统输液管的研究(1 项群组试验和 2 项患者水平随机试验;5 项观察性研究)。我们有高度确定性的证据表明,小容量输血管减少了每日和累计采血量;有中度确定性的证据表明,小容量输血管降低了输血风险和平均输注红细胞单位数,但这些估计值因不精确而受到限制。我们高度确定小容量采血管具有相似的标本数量不足率。专家小组认为,小容量试管的理想效果大于不理想效果,减少了资源浪费,而且可行,多个国家的成功实施就证明了这一点,尽管在实验室仪器上验证小容量试管需要前期实施成本:ICM-RPG小组根据总体中等确定性证据,强烈建议在成人重症监护病房使用小容量样本采集管。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Small-volume blood sample collection tubes in adult intensive care units: A rapid practice guideline.

Background: This Intensive Care Medicine Rapid Practice Guideline (ICM-RPG) provides an evidence-based recommendation to address the question: in adult patients in intensive care units (ICUs), should we use small-volume or conventional blood collection tubes?

Methods: We included 23 panelists in 8 countries and assessed and managed financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the Guidelines in Intensive Care, Development, and Evaluation (GUIDE) group. We conducted a systematic review, including evidence from observational and randomized studies. Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework.

Results: We identified 8 studies (1 cluster and 2 patient-level randomized trials; 5 observational studies) comparing small-volume to conventional tubes. We had high certainty evidence that small-volume tubes reduce daily and cumulative blood sampling volume; and moderate certainty evidence that they reduce the risk of transfusion and mean number of red blood cell units transfused, but these estimates were limited by imprecision. We had high certainty that small-volume tubes have a similar rate of specimens with insufficient quantity. The panel considered that the desirable effects of small-volume tubes outweigh the undesirable effects, are less wasteful of resources, and are feasible, as demonstrated by successful implementation across multiple countries, although there are upfront implementation costs to validate small-volume tubes on laboratory instrumentation.

Conclusion: This ICM-RPG panel made a strong recommendation for the use of small-volume sample collection tubes in adult ICUs based on overall moderate certainty evidence.

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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
×
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