ArticleTransfusion2025
Evaluating reimbursement for prehospital blood transfusions: A nationwide survey.
Article in Transfusion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Revisiting whole blood transfusion for the massively bleeding patient: The origins of resistance to change.Transfusion · 2026Article
- Unequal access to timely care: Geographic variation in prehospital time among injured patients at risk of hemorrhagic shock.Transfusion · 2026Article
- Reversible causes of death and the potential benefit of invasive emergency techniques in paediatric and adolescent trauma: a 12-years retrospective forensic analysis.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Expanding access to prehospital blood products: a narrative review of clinical evidence, systems barriers, and statewide strategies.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrehospital blood transfusion improves survival among patients in hemorrhagic shock but remains underutilized, in part due to financial barriers. However, little is known about how prehospital blood transfusion programs are reimbursed. The objective of this study is to determine the percentage of prehospital blood transfusion programs that receive reimbursement, the percentage of patients receiving blood who were public health insurance-eligible (pediatric and geriatric patients), and the most common reason for blood transfusions in these populations. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsAn electronic survey was administered to Emergency Medical Services agencies with an active blood transfusion program in 2024. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Of the 53/150 agencies who responded to the survey, only 6 (11%) agencies reported receiving reimbursement for prehospital blood transfusions. However, 53 (100%) agencies reported transfusing geriatric patients, and 43 (81%) agencies reported transfusing pediatric patients, both groups that are eligible for public health insurance. Medical emergencies were the most common indications for transfusion in geriatric patients, whereas blunt and/or penetrating injuries were the primary indications for transfusion in pediatric patients. For most agencies, geriatric and pediatric patients were frequent recipients of blood transfusions, each comprising up to 50% of the total transfusions administered.
conclusionMany patients who receive prehospital blood transfusion are public health insurance-eligible. Health policy changes to enable government reimbursement for prehospital blood transfusions would provide critical financial support for this life-saving intervention.
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.