BACKGROUND Patient blood management (PBM) programs are associated with improved patient outcomes, reduced transfusions and costs. In 2008, the Western Australia Department of Health initiated a comprehensive health‐system–wide PBM program. This study assesses program outcomes. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS This was a retrospective study of 605,046 patients admitted to four major adult tertiary‐care hospitals between July 2008 and June 2014. Outcome measures were red blood cell (RBC), fresh‐frozen plasma (FFP), and platelet units transfused; single‐unit RBC transfusions; pretransfusion hemoglobin levels; elective surgery patients anemic at admission; product and activity‐based costs of transfusion; in‐hospital mortality; length of stay; 28‐day all‐cause emergency readmissions; and hospital‐acquired complications. RESULTS Comparing final year with baseline, units of RBCs, FFP, and platelets transfused per admission decreased 41% (p < 0.001), representing a saving of AU$18,507,092 (US$18,078,258) and between AU$80 million and AU$100 million (US$78 million and US$97 million) estimated activity‐based savings. Mean pretransfusion hemoglobin levels decreased 7.9 g/dL to 7.3 g/dL (p < 0.001), and anemic elective surgery admissions decreased 20.8% to 14.4% (p = 0.001). Single‐unit RBC transfusions increased from 33.3% to 63.7% (p < 0.001). There were risk‐adjusted reductions in hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67‐0.77; p < 0.001), length of stay (incidence rate ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.84‐0.87; p < 0.001), hospital‐acquired infections (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73‐0.86; p < 0.001), and acute myocardial infarction‐stroke (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.58‐0.82; p < 0.001). All‐cause emergency readmissions increased (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02‐1.10; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION Implementation of a unique, jurisdiction‐wide PBM program was associated with improved patient outcomes, reduced blood product utilization, and product‐related cost savings.

Objectives: To determine whether a multidisciplinary, multimodal Patient Blood Management (PBM) program for patients undergoing surgery is effective in reducing perioperative complication rate, and thereby is effective in improving clinical outcome. Background: PBM is a medical concept with the focus on a comprehensive anemia management, to minimize iatrogenic (unnecessary) blood loss, and to harness and optimize patient-specific physiological tolerance of anemia. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Eligible studies had to address each of the 3 PBM pillars with at least 1 measure per pillar, for example, preoperative anemia management plus cell salvage plus rational transfusion strategy. The study protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017079217). Results: Seventeen studies comprising 235,779 surgical patients were included in this meta-analysis (100,886 pre-PBM group and 134,893 PBM group). Implementation of PBM significantly reduced transfusion rates by 39% [risk ratio (RR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55–0.68, P < 0.00001], 0.43 red blood cell units per patient (mean difference −0.43, 95% CI −0.54 to −0.31, P < 0.00001), hospital length of stay (mean difference −0.45, 95% CI −0.65 to −0.25, P < 0,00001), total number of complications (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74–0.88, P <0.00001), and mortality rate (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80–0.98, P = 0.02). Conclusions: Overall, a comprehensive PBM program addressing all 3 PBM pillars is associated with reduced transfusion need of red blood cell units, lower complication and mortality rate, and thereby improving clinical outcome. Thus, this first meta-analysis investigating a multimodal approach should motivate all executives and health care providers to support further PBM activities.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a pandemic. Global health care now faces unprecedented challenges with widespread and rapid human-to-human transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and high morbidity and mortality with COVID-19 worldwide. Across the world, medical care is hampered by a critical shortage of not only hand sanitizers, personal protective equipment, ventilators, and hospital beds, but also impediments to the blood supply. Blood donation centers in many areas around the globe have mostly closed. Donors, practicing social distancing, some either with illness or undergoing self-quarantine, are quickly diminishing. Drastic public health initiatives have focused on containment and “flattening the curve” while invaluable resources are being depleted. In some countries, the point has been reached at which the demand for such resources, including donor blood, outstrips the supply. Questions as to the safety of blood persist. Although it does not appear very likely that the virus can be transmitted through allogeneic blood transfusion, this still remains to be fully determined. As options dwindle, we must enact regional and national shortage plans worldwide and more vitally disseminate the knowledge of and immediately implement patient blood management (PBM). PBM is an evidence-based bundle of care to optimize medical and surgical patient outcomes by clinically managing and preserving a patient’s own blood. This multinational and diverse group of authors issue this “Call to Action” underscoring “The Essential Role of Patient Blood Management in the Management of Pandemics” and urging all stakeholders and providers to implement the practical and commonsense principles of PBM and its multiprofessional and multimodality approaches.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The objective of this paper is to introduce clinicians and health care professionals to the concept of patient blood management (PBM) and to explain the difference between PBM and the concept of "appropriate use" of blood products. The five reasons why modern health systems need to shift from product-focused transfusion practice to PBM are also presented. These are: the aging population with a leveraged demand for blood products opposed to a shrinking donor base; the growing awareness that transfusion is a complex service involving many different cost centers within a hospital and representing a multiple of the blood product cost; the continuous effort to protect blood pools from known, new, or re-emerging pathogens while facing uncertainty over their potentially long silent carrier states; the emerging evidence that transfusion is an independent risk factor for adverse outcomes; and finally, a lack of evidence for benefit of transfusion for the vast majority of recipients. The Oncologist 2011;16(suppl 3):3-11

In patients admitted to the intensive care unit who were anaemic, intravenous iron, compared with placebo, did not result in a significant lowering of red blood cell transfusion requirement during hospital stay. Patients who received intravenous iron had a significantly higher haemoglobin concentration at hospital discharge. The trial was registered at http://www.anzctr.org.au as # ACTRN12612001249842.