ArticleTransfusion2025
Massive transfusion policy in the Netherlands, 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 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.
- Multicenter survey on viscoelastic assays access and use in trauma in Swiss emergency departments.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Massive transfusion policy in the Netherlands, a nationwide survey.Transfusion · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMassive transfusion protocols (MTPs) guide the physician in optimizing transfusion strategies. Although international guidelines on massive transfusion exist, it is unknown whether all Dutch hospitals adhere to these guidelines. The main objective of this study was to create an overview of the massive transfusion strategies of Dutch hospitals and to evaluate if logistical factors, for example, the unavailability of thawed plasma, influence transfusion practices. Furthermore, this study was initiated to evaluate the interest in a ready-to-use plasma product. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsA questionnaire on transfusion strategy, available resources, and yearly usage/wastage of transfusion products was distributed to all hospitals in the Netherlands.
resultsSixty-nine hospitals were approached, of which 58 responded (response rate 84%). The majority of hospitals (67%) strived for a 1:1 erythrocyte/plasma ratio. Five percent of the hospitals used an erythrocyte/plasma ratio >2:1, which did not meet (inter)national guidelines. No relation was found between the clinical strategy described in the MTP and available resources; moreover, direct plasma availability did not increase plasma wastage. Hospitals for which it takes longer to have plasma available for transfusion generally are more interested in a ready-to-use plasma product (n = 55, 75.0% vs. 57%).
conclusionThis was the first nationwide survey on massive transfusion practices in the Netherlands. There is clear uniformity when it comes to using an MTP. Logistics surrounding plasma availability or plasma thawing capacity did not influence MTPs. Nevertheless, there seems to be substantial interest in a ready-to-use plasma product, especially in hospitals with limited plasma use.
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.