ArticleAsian journal of transfusion science
Adherence to low volume massive hemorrhage protocol: Experience from an urban level 1 trauma center.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesAdherence to the massive hemorrhage protocol (MHP) is essential for its successful implementation. An indigenous low-volume MHP was designed in accordance with the institutional needs. Adherence to various components of the designed MHP components was assessed. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective analysis of all MHP activations for 1-year duration was performed. Patient demographics, injury details, and baseline vitals were collected along with details of transfusion. Adherence to critical steps such as activation criteria, timing of delivery of the blood components, pack size and ratios of blood components, and endpoints were assessed, followed by calculation of adherence scores.
resultsMHP was activated in 1.1% of patients presenting to the emergency. Massive transfusions were required for 76%. Adherence scores of ≥50% were achieved in 77% of MHP activations. Timely issue of the first transfusion pack was achieved in all cases, whereas the demand for the red blood cell (RBC) components exceeded the predefined number of units, thus affecting the desired ratio of blood components. Hemorrhagic deaths within 24 h were observed in 13 patients and were not affected by the overall adherence scores.
conclusionAdherence to prepared MHP was moderate for most patients. Adherence can be improved significantly by increasing the number of compatible blood components after the first transfusion pack in case of limited inventory. In addition, reducing the delivery time for the subsequent transfusion packs, incorporation of hemostatic adjuncts, and point-of-care tests in the MHP should be considered on a priority basis.
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.