Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40950533›Full record

ArticleActa medica Philippina2025

Pre-analytical Factors Influencing Blood Sample Rejection Rate in the Hematology Laboratory of the Philippine General Hospital from 2018 to 2022: A Cross-sectional Study.

Jaspher B Aquino, Karen B Damian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta medica Philippina, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Jaspher B AquinoDepartment of Laboratories, Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila.
Karen B DamianDepartment of Pathology, College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objective: Blood collection errors are one of the most common causes of laboratory sample rejection in the pre-analytical phase of the testing process. This study aims to determine the frequency and identify the pre-analytical factors that lead to rejection of samples meant for the hematology laboratory. Methods: This cross-sectional, retrospective study analyzed blood samples received and rejected by the Hematology Division of the University of the Philippines - Philippine General Hospital from 2018 to 2022. Data were extracted from the Division's annual reports and sample rejection logbooks. The causes and frequency of sample rejections, as well as the hospital locations of the patients involved were presented using frequency tables. Results: Out of 1,072,366 blood samples received during the study period, 61,935 (5.78%) were rejected. The most common cause of rejection was clotted blood samples for both routine hematology (86.31%) and coagulation (44.43%). Clotted samples were the predominant cause of sample rejection across most age groups, with the exception of the neonatal and infancy groups, where inadequate sample quantity was the primary issue. The highest rejection rate was seen in the emergency department (65.71%) and intensive care units (9.68%). Conclusion: The rejection rate in our institution was higher than reported in previous global studies. The main causes of rejection were identified as clotted blood samples and inadequate blood volume for routine hematology and coagulation testing. Notably, the highest rejection rates for hematology-related requests occurred in critical areas, including the emergency department, intensive care units, and obstetrics and gynecology.

Indexed as

blood sample collectioncoagulation testhematology testpre-analytical phaserejection rate

Identifiers

PMID40950533
PMCPMC12424561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.