ArticleTransfusion medicine (Oxford, England)2026
Knowledge and attitudes toward perioperative patient blood management: A cross-sectional study among Anaesthesiology and Orthopaedic Surgery Departments at a university hospital.
Article in Transfusion medicine (Oxford, England), 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPerioperative patient blood management (PBM) is a crucial, multidisciplinary, evidence-based approach aimed at optimising patient outcomes by reducing unnecessary erythrocyte transfusions. This study assessed the knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals in two key surgical specialties toward PBM.
methodsThis cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey involved personnel from the Department of Anaesthesiology and the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at a university hospital. The questionnaire assessed knowledge (scored out of 100) and attitudes (specifically self-reported adherence, scored out of 100). The correct responses were based on the PBM guidelines and institutional protocols. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of adherence.
resultsThe overall response rate was 86.2% (n = 250) from 163 Anaesthesiology and 87 Orthopaedic Surgery. The Orthopaedic Surgery group scored significantly lower on knowledge assessments than the Anaesthesiology group (median score 48 vs. 58, p < 0.001). However, the attitude scores were statistically similar (median score 77 vs. 76, p = 0.237), revealing a knowledge-attitude paradox. Multivariable logistic regression identified hierarchical position as the only significant independent predictor: staff physicians were 7.1 times more likely to report adherence compared to residents (adjusted odds ratios 7.1, 95% confidence interval 3.1-16.2, p < 0.001). Individual knowledge level was not a significant predictor.
conclusionsOur study demonstrates that hierarchical mandate, not individual knowledge or department affiliation, is the primary driver of PBM adherence. Implementation efforts must therefore leverage staff physician leadership to mandate PBM as the institutional standard of care, ensuring that positive attitudes translate into consistent practice.
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.