我们真的需要在初次全膝关节或髋关节置换术前进行常规的血液交叉配合术吗?

Gary M Mundy, Kate Hardiment, John Revill, Stuart J Birtwistle, Richard A Power
{"title":"我们真的需要在初次全膝关节或髋关节置换术前进行常规的血液交叉配合术吗?","authors":"Gary M Mundy,&nbsp;Kate Hardiment,&nbsp;John Revill,&nbsp;Stuart J Birtwistle,&nbsp;Richard A Power","doi":"10.1080/00016470410001439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A maximum surgical blood ordering schedule may lead to wastage of valuable resources due to over-ordering of blood and/or under-utilisation. We audited the results of a group-and-save (GS) policy for primary hip (THR) and knee (TKR) arthroplasty to evaluate its safety and practicality.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive patients attending for THR (177) or TKR (137) over a period of 8 months (phase 1). Following introduction of a limited GS policy, 205 THR and 147 TKR were reviewed prospectively over a corresponding period of 8 months (phase 2). Corresponding THR and TKR groups in each phase were comparable with respect to age, gender, length of stay, operating surgeon, pre- and lowest postoperative hemoglobin, reason for and timing of transfusion. Quantities (units) of blood requested pre- and postoperatively, transfused and returned to the blood bank, were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>77 and 62% of all blood requested for THR and TKR, respectively, in phase 1 was not used. 58 and 21% of patients undergoing THR and TKR, respectively, in phase 2 underwent preoperative GS, with 92% and 100% of all blood requested being used for transfusion. Overall, the quantity of blood returned was reduced by 25% for the THR group. Transfusion rates fell by 9% and 5% for the TKR and THR groups, respectively. We found no adverse events associated with blood from a GS sample. Cost savings of 37 800 euro were calculated estimated for the study period (phase 2).</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>For routine primary THR/TKR, GS policy is a safe procedure. Reduction in non-utilisation of blood has economic and cost-saving implications for limited healthcare resources. Having subsequently introduced a group-and-save policy for all patients undergoing routine THR/TKR, considerable savings have been identified after only 2 months.</p>","PeriodicalId":75403,"journal":{"name":"Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica","volume":"75 5","pages":"567-72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00016470410001439","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do we really need to routinely crossmatch blood before primary total knee or hip arthroplasty?\",\"authors\":\"Gary M Mundy,&nbsp;Kate Hardiment,&nbsp;John Revill,&nbsp;Stuart J Birtwistle,&nbsp;Richard A Power\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00016470410001439\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A maximum surgical blood ordering schedule may lead to wastage of valuable resources due to over-ordering of blood and/or under-utilisation. We audited the results of a group-and-save (GS) policy for primary hip (THR) and knee (TKR) arthroplasty to evaluate its safety and practicality.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive patients attending for THR (177) or TKR (137) over a period of 8 months (phase 1). Following introduction of a limited GS policy, 205 THR and 147 TKR were reviewed prospectively over a corresponding period of 8 months (phase 2). Corresponding THR and TKR groups in each phase were comparable with respect to age, gender, length of stay, operating surgeon, pre- and lowest postoperative hemoglobin, reason for and timing of transfusion. Quantities (units) of blood requested pre- and postoperatively, transfused and returned to the blood bank, were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>77 and 62% of all blood requested for THR and TKR, respectively, in phase 1 was not used. 58 and 21% of patients undergoing THR and TKR, respectively, in phase 2 underwent preoperative GS, with 92% and 100% of all blood requested being used for transfusion. Overall, the quantity of blood returned was reduced by 25% for the THR group. Transfusion rates fell by 9% and 5% for the TKR and THR groups, respectively. We found no adverse events associated with blood from a GS sample. Cost savings of 37 800 euro were calculated estimated for the study period (phase 2).</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>For routine primary THR/TKR, GS policy is a safe procedure. Reduction in non-utilisation of blood has economic and cost-saving implications for limited healthcare resources. Having subsequently introduced a group-and-save policy for all patients undergoing routine THR/TKR, considerable savings have been identified after only 2 months.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75403,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\"75 5\",\"pages\":\"567-72\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00016470410001439\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00016470410001439\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00016470410001439","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

背景:最大限度的外科采血计划可能导致宝贵资源的浪费,由于血液的过度订购和/或利用不足。我们审核了原发性髋关节(THR)和膝关节(TKR)置换术的分组和保存(GS)政策的结果,以评估其安全性和实用性。患者及方法:我们对连续8个月接受THR(177)或TKR(137)的患者进行了回顾性研究(第一阶段)。在引入有限GS政策后,对205例THR和147例TKR进行了前瞻性研究,为期8个月(第二阶段)。每个阶段相应的THR和TKR组在年龄、性别、住院时间、手术医生、术前和术后最低血红蛋白、输血原因和时间方面具有可比性。记录术前、术后需血量、输血量及返回血库的血量(单位)。结果:第1期THR和TKR要求的所有血液中,分别有77%和62%未使用。在第2期接受THR和TKR的患者中,分别有58%和21%的患者接受了术前GS, 92%和100%的血液被用于输血。总的来说,THR组的回血量减少了25%。TKR组和THR组的输血率分别下降了9%和5%。我们没有发现与GS样本相关的不良反应。在研究期间(第二阶段),估计节省了37800欧元的成本。解释:对于常规的主要THR/TKR, GS政策是一个安全的程序。减少不用血对有限的卫生保健资源具有经济和节约成本的意义。随后对所有接受常规THR/TKR的患者引入了集体节约政策,仅在2个月后就发现了可观的节约。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do we really need to routinely crossmatch blood before primary total knee or hip arthroplasty?

Background: A maximum surgical blood ordering schedule may lead to wastage of valuable resources due to over-ordering of blood and/or under-utilisation. We audited the results of a group-and-save (GS) policy for primary hip (THR) and knee (TKR) arthroplasty to evaluate its safety and practicality.

Patients and methods: We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive patients attending for THR (177) or TKR (137) over a period of 8 months (phase 1). Following introduction of a limited GS policy, 205 THR and 147 TKR were reviewed prospectively over a corresponding period of 8 months (phase 2). Corresponding THR and TKR groups in each phase were comparable with respect to age, gender, length of stay, operating surgeon, pre- and lowest postoperative hemoglobin, reason for and timing of transfusion. Quantities (units) of blood requested pre- and postoperatively, transfused and returned to the blood bank, were recorded.

Results: 77 and 62% of all blood requested for THR and TKR, respectively, in phase 1 was not used. 58 and 21% of patients undergoing THR and TKR, respectively, in phase 2 underwent preoperative GS, with 92% and 100% of all blood requested being used for transfusion. Overall, the quantity of blood returned was reduced by 25% for the THR group. Transfusion rates fell by 9% and 5% for the TKR and THR groups, respectively. We found no adverse events associated with blood from a GS sample. Cost savings of 37 800 euro were calculated estimated for the study period (phase 2).

Interpretation: For routine primary THR/TKR, GS policy is a safe procedure. Reduction in non-utilisation of blood has economic and cost-saving implications for limited healthcare resources. Having subsequently introduced a group-and-save policy for all patients undergoing routine THR/TKR, considerable savings have been identified after only 2 months.

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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信