ArticleTurkish journal of emergency medicine2016
The evaluation of the audit of Fresh-Frozen Plasma (FFP) usage in emergency department.
Article in Turkish journal of emergency medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perindopril/amlodipine-induced thrombotic microangiopathy.Turkish journal of emergency medicineArticle
- Development of blood demand prediction model using artificial intelligence based on national public big data.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn our study, the aim is to evaluate the use of Fresh-Frozen Plasma (FFP) in our emergency department and to assess its audit for transfusion.
methodsAll the patients aged 18 and over who received FFP transfusion in the emergency department between March 1, 2013 and March 1, 2016 were included into the study. The audit of FFP use was evaluated by according to
resultsTotal 141 patients were identified to receive FFP transfusion in our emergency department. When the audit of FFP use was evaluated, 59.6% of all the practices were regarded as improper use. We identified that while the rate of improper use was 40.2% in patients with bleeding, it rose to 90.7% in patients without active bleeding or in those who used FFP with the aim of bleeding prophylaxis.
conclusionWe have determined that FFP transfusions were conducted with improper indications at high rate in our emergency department. Preparing an up-to-date transfusion guideline for the practices in emergency departments in our country and training and supervising the medical staff at regular intervals may help prevent the shortcomings in FFP practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.