ArticleTransfusion2021
Blood usage at a large academic center in Maryland in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.
Article in Transfusion, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of blood products during the first months of COVID-19 pandemic period: A single center report.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Blood shortages and changes to massive transfusion protocols: Survey of hospital practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.Transfusion and apheresis science : official journal of the World Apheresis Association : official journal of the European Society for Haemapheresis · 2022Article
- Article
- Blood usage at a large academic center in Maryland in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.Transfusion · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBlood usage and collections were impacted throughout 2020 both by the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as public health decisions affecting hospital operations. We sought to understand the longer-term effects of the pandemic on blood usage via changes in case volume and clinical intensity as well as whether the blood needs of COVID-19-positive patients differed from other transfused patients. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsA single-center retrospective study of blood use in 2020 as compared to 2014-2019 was conducted at a tertiary care center. Statistical analysis was performed in an R-based workflow. p values are reported using two-sided t-tests for total hospital blood usage and using Mann-Whitney U tests for comparisons of patient blood usage.
resultsMean monthly red cell usage in 2020 decreased by 11.2% (p = .003), plasma usage decreased by 23.8%, (p < .001) platelet usage decreased by 11.4% (p < .001), and monthly cryoprecipitate use increased by 18% (p = .03). A linear regression model predicted significant associations between total blood usage and the year, number of Medicare eligible discharges, and Case Mix Index. COVID-19-positive patients requiring at least one blood product did not use significantly different amounts of red cells, plasma, or platelets from all other transfused patients.
conclusionsYear 2020 began with decreased blood usage that was normalized by late spring. Reassuringly, transfused COVID-19-positive patients in general and those requiring ICU level care do not use significantly increased amounts of blood as compared to similar transfused hospital patients.
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.