ArticleTransfusion medicine (Oxford, England)2025
Implementing bedside electronic transfusion checks at Barts Health NHS Trust: A study protocol for evaluating the effectiveness and value for money.
Article in Transfusion medicine (Oxford, England), 2025. 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.
- Efficiency and safety gains from bedside electronic transfusion checks in four hospitals in England.British journal of haematology · 2026Observational
- Staff satisfaction with the use of bedside electronic transfusion checks at three hospitals in London.Vox sanguinis · 2026Article
- Transforming transfusion safety: Insights from implementing bedside electronic checks at a large UK National Health Service trust.Vox sanguinis · 2026Article
- Implementing bedside electronic transfusion checks at Barts Health NHS Trust: A study protocol for evaluating the effectiveness and value for money.Transfusion medicine (Oxford, England) · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the benefits of implementing Bedside Electronic Transfusion Checks (BETC) to patients and value for money at four hospitals at Barts Health NHS Trust.
backgroundBETC aims to enhance transfusion safety by reducing errors associated with positive patient identification checks for compatibility, blood sample labelling, and blood component administration. There is limited evidence on the potential benefits to patients and healthcare professionals as well as value for money for implementing BETC.
methodsThe BETC implementation at four hospitals adopted a non-randomised, staggered, multi-phase strategy. Alongside the implementation, an evaluation study was conducted. The intervention consists of a portable handheld scanning device and a mobile printer used for printing labels that are attached to the compatibility blood bottles and for verifying the patient's details against blood units prior to blood administration. Eligible patients are those who received blood transfusions or had compatibility tests performed during the evaluation period. The outcomes for evaluation include transfusion-related errors and cost savings from an NHS perspective. Regression-based time-series intervention analyses will be applied to evaluate the impacts of BETC implementation. EXPECTED
resultsThe three-year evaluation includes a 12-month pre-implementation period (May 2022 to April 2023) and a 24-month implementation period (May 2023 to April 2025). All staff involved with bedside transfusion were trained on the new system. Data were collected from different transfusion datasets, process mapping dataset, and Health Economics Inventory dataset. DISCUSSION: Findings from this evaluation study will provide empirical evidence on the effectiveness and value for money of implementing BETC and will support decision-making for its wider roll-out in the UK.
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.