BACKGROUND: The optimal method of providing transfusion medicine (TM) education has not been determined. Transfusion Camp was established in 2012 at the University of Toronto as a centrally delivered TM education program for postgraduate trainees. The impact of Transfusion Camp on knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported behavior was evaluated. METHODS: Didactic lectures (delivered locally, bywebinar, or recorded) and locally facilitated team-based learning seminars were delivered over 5 days during the academic year to 8 sites: 7 in Canada and 1 in the United Kingdom. Knowledge assessment using a validated 20-question multiple-choice exam was conducted before and after Transfusion Camp. Attitudes and self-reported behavior were collected through a survey. RESULTS:Over 2 academic years (July 2016 to June 2018), 390 trainees from 16 different specialties (predominantly anesthesia, 41%; hematology, 14%; and critical care, 7%) attended at least 1 day of Transfusion Camp. The mean pretest score was 10.3 of 20 (AE2.9; n = 286) compared with posttest score of 13.0 (AE2.8; n = 194; p < 0.0001). Lower pretest score and greater attendance (4-5 days compared with 1-3 days) were associated with larger improvement in posttest score; delivery format, specialty, and postgraduate year were not. Trainees reported an improvement in self-rated abilities to manage TM scenarios; 95% rated TM knowledge as very or extremely important in providing patient care; and 81% indicated that they had applied learning from Transfusion Camp into clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: TransfusionCamp increased TM knowledge, fostered a positive attitude toward TM, and enabled a self-reported positive impact on transfusion practice in postgraduate trainees. It is a novel and scalable approach to delivering TM education. ABBREVIATIONS: PGY = postgraduate year; TBL = team-based learning; TM = transfusion medicine.From the

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an inexpensive therapy effective at minimizing perioperative blood loss and transfusion. However, it remains underutilized due to safety concerns. To date, no evidence-based guidelines exist identifying which patients should not receive TXA therapy. This study determined patient groups for whom safety information regarding TXA is lacking due to common exclusion from perioperative TXA trials. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A systematicreview searching the databases Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Clinicaltrials.gov was performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) administering systemic TXA perioperatively to elective or emergent surgery patients were eligible. Our primary outcome was to describe exclusion criteria of RCTs, and the secondary outcome was TXA safety. A descriptive synthesis of exclusion criteria was performed, and TXA safety was assessed by meta-analysis.ABBREVIATIONS: CIs = confidence intervals; RCTs = randomized controlled trials; RRs = relative risks; TXA = tranexamic acid; VTEs = venous thromboembolic events.From the

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This study again indicated that transfusion knowledge is poor among internal medicine trainees and that this does not improve with increasing number of years of training. Innovative strategies for transfusion education are urgently needed and should be rigorously assessed for efficacy.

BACKGROUND The risks and benefits of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in palliative care patients remain poorly understood. We reviewed the literature to summarize available information on RBC transfusion in this population. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL) from inception through September 2016 to identify studies reporting data on palliative patients receiving RBC transfusion. Original studies that assessed RBC transfusion as an intervention and reported at least one clinical outcome were included. Study characteristics, results on transfusion‐related outcomes, and authors' conclusions on the value of transfusion in palliative patients were abstracted and reported. RESULTS We identified 1839 studies, of which 137 were selected for data extraction and 13 were included (11 case series, one prospective cohort, and one retrospective cohort). Nine studies addressed symptom relief following transfusion using subjective symptom scales, of which eight (89%) indicated some degree of short‐term benefit and one study (11%) showed no benefit. Posttransfusion survival was reported in four studies—one demonstrated prolonged survival in patients receiving RBC transfusion; three had no comparison group. Other outcomes reported included hemoglobin values posttransfusion in four studies and adverse events following transfusion in three studies. CONCLUSIONS In palliative care, RBC transfusion may provide symptom relief and improve subjective well‐being, though the duration and magnitude of this effect, and transfusion‐associated risks specific to this population remain unclear. Currently, no high quality evidence exists to support or guide the use of RBC transfusion in this population. Moreover, the clinical heterogeneity within the palliative population limits the interpretation of most studies.

A case of acute hemolytic transfusion reaction caused by anti-AnWj is reported in a patient with aplastic anemia requiring allogeneic stem cell transplantation. This is the second documented case of anti-AnWj to cause a hemolytic transfusion reaction. The case demonstrates the complexity of managing patients with rare antibodies and the importance of international collaboration in the management of these difficult cases.