ReviewJournal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care2026
Recommendations for implementing patient blood management-an updated modified Delphi consensus from a multidisciplinary expert panel in Hong Kong.
Review in Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2020, the Hong Kong Society of Clinical Blood Management (HKSCBM) established a consensus statement on the implementation of patient blood management (PBM). Based on recent evidence on PBM initiatives and practices, the HKSCBM updated their consensus statements. HKSCBM convened a multidisciplinary panel of 13 experts, who formulated discussion questions across three PBM pillars: (1) optimising patients' red blood cell mass and improving anaemia management; (2) minimising perioperative blood loss; and (3) rationalising the use of blood and blood components. Using the modified Delphi method, the panel addressed the discussion questions by reviewing relevant literature and clinical experiences in multiple meetings. Consensus statements derived from meeting proceedings were voted anonymously by the panel. A consensus statement was accepted only if ≥ 80% of the panel chose 'accept completely' or 'accept with some reservation', based on a 5-point Likert scale. The panel accepted 117 consensus statements (including sub-statements). The updated version includes new additions to the following areas: identification of groups at high risk for iron deficiency anaemia; preoperative screening and management of iron deficiency and/or anaemia; recognition of bleeding-prone surgeries and conditions; recent measures to minimise intraoperative blood loss, including point-of-care coagulation testing, tranexamic acid, fibrinogen concentrate, reversal agents for anticoagulation, advanced haemodynamic monitoring, and uterotonics; suggested haemoglobin thresholds for transfusions; and implementation of transfusion protocols. These consensus statements are intended to serve as a practical framework for medical and surgical colleagues in Hong Kong and the Asia-Pacific region.
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.