ArticleAsian journal of transfusion science
Audit-based corrective and preventive actions to reduce wastage of blood components at a single blood center: A quality improvement study.
Article in Asian journal of transfusion science. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe rate of discarded blood components or "wastage rate" reflects on the whole process, preparation, and production of blood and its quality control. It is the ratio of blood and blood components discarded to the total number of collections. The discard or unusability of blood products are many, and the ones that can be monitored and regarded as indicators to be improvised on are QC failure rate, transfusion-transmitted infection (TTI) positivity, and component discards (other than TTI), including those that caused transfusion reactions. These were studied over four intervention cycles to see if they could be improved. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a clinical audit and quality improvement study. The clinical audit was conducted over four cycles over 16 months. Each cycle included three stages wherein the data required for calculating those key performance indicators (KPIs) of the blood center were studied and analyzed, and causes for the poorly performing ones were identified; a corrective plan was drawn and implemented, followed by data collection and interpretation of the same in the next cycle for improvement. The data were compiled using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and analyzed using SPSS version 19 (IBM Corporation, New York, USA).
resultsThe overall discard rates due to all cumulative causes mentioned were at about 5% at the start of the first cycle. The various factors comprising preparatory, preparation, and the management of inventory and issue were analyzed, and corrective interventions were performed in every cycle. The discard rates were reduced to about 3% by the end of the four cycles. The difference was statistically significant, with a
conclusionThe implementation of Corrective and preventive action measures can rectify the deviations in KPIs. The blood center director, staff, and doctors should be responsible for maintaining and continuously improving the quality indicators.
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.