Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37238363›Full record

ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Evaluation of a Pre-Filled Table and a Flowchart-Based Algorithm as Cognitive Aids to Reduce Deviations in Dose Calculation for Intraoperative Red Blood Cell Transfusions in Children-An International Web-Based Simulation.

Florian Piekarski, Stephanie Noone, Thomas Engelhardt, Martin Hellmich, Eva Wittenmeier, Vinicius Quintao, Philip Arnold, Susan M Goobie, Kai Zacharowski, Jost Kaufmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Florian PiekarskiDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University, 60590 Frankfurt, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4095-3573
Stephanie NooneDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University, 60590 Frankfurt, Germany.
Thomas EngelhardtDepartment for Anesthesia, Montreal Children's Hospital, Montreal, QC 1001, Canada.
Martin HellmichInstitute for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Epidemiology (IMSIE), University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, 50923 Cologne, Germany.
Eva WittenmeierDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7180-4848
Vinicius QuintaoDiscipline of Anesthesiology, Hospital das Clínicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-6459-7983
Philip ArnoldThe Jackson Rees Department of Anaesthesia, Alder Hey Children's Hospital, Liverpool L12 2AP, UK.
Susan M GoobieDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8697-089X
Kai ZacharowskiDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University, 60590 Frankfurt, Germany.
Jost KaufmannDepartment for Paediatric Anaesthesia, Children's Hospital Cologne, 50735 Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5289-6465

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransfusion of red blood cell concentrate can be life-saving, but requires accurate dose calculations in children.

aimsWe tested the hypothesis that cognitive aids would improve identification of the correct recommended volumes and products, according to the German National Transfusion guidelines, in pediatric transfusion scenarios.

methodsFour online questionnaire-based scenarios, two with hemodynamically stable and two with hemodynamically unstable children, were sent to German and international pediatric anesthetists for completion. In the two stable scenarios, participants were given pre-filled tables that contained all required information. For the two emergency scenarios, existing algorithms were used and required calculation by the user. The results were classified into three categories of deviations from the recommended values (DRV): DRV120 (<80% or >120%), as the acceptable variation; DRV 300 (<33% or >300%), the deviation of concern for potential harm; and DRV 1000 (<10% or >1000%), the excessive deviation with a high probability of harm.

resultsA total of 1.458 pediatric anesthetists accessed this simulation questionnaire, and 402 completed questionnaires were available for analysis. A pre-filled tabular aid, avoiding calculations, led to a reduction in deviation rates in the category of DRV120 by 60% for each and of DRV300 by 17% and 20%, respectively. The use of algorithms as aids for unstable emergencies led to a reduction in the deviation rate only for DRV120 (20% and 15% respectively). In contrast, the deviation rates for DRV300 and DRV1000 rose by 37% and 16%, respectively. Participants used higher transfusion thresholds for the emergency case of a 2-year-old compromised child than for the stable case with a patient of the same age (on average, 8.6 g/dL, 95% CI 8.5-8.8 versus 7.1 g/dL, 95% CI 7.0-7.2,

conclusionsThe use of cognitive aids with precalculated transfusion volumes for determining transfusion doses in children may lead to improved adherence to published recommendations, and could potentially reduce dosing deviations outside those recommended by the German national transfusion guidelines.

Indexed as

blood losschildrencognitive aidsred blood cellsimulationtransfusion

Identifiers

PMID37238363
PMCPMC10217180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.