Literature DB >> 30427540

Evaluation of the National Healthcare Safety Network Hemovigilance Module for transfusion-related adverse reactions in the United States.

Chris Edens1,2, Kathryn A Haass1, Melissa Cumming3, Anthony Osinski3, Lynne O'Hearn4, Kelly Passanisi4, Lynn Eaton4, Paul Visintainer4, Alexandra Savinkina1,5, Matthew J Kuehnert1, Sridhar V Basavaraju1, Chester Andrzejewski3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) Hemovigilance Module (HM) collects data on the frequency, severity, and imputability of transfusion-associated adverse events. These events contribute to significant morbidity and mortality among transfusion patients. We report results from the first systematic assessment of eight attributes of the HM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standard methods were used to assess the HM. Evaluation data included training materials, system modification history, and facility survey information. A concordance analysis was performed using data from the Baystate Medical Center's (Springfield, MA) electronic transfusion reporting system.
RESULTS: In 2016, system representativeness remained low, with 6% (277 of 4690) of acute care facilities across 43 jurisdictions enrolled in the HM. In 2016, 48% (2147 of 4453) and 89% (3969 of 4,453) of adverse reactions were reported within 30 and 90 days of the reaction date, respectively, compared to 21% (109 of 511) and 56% (284 of 511) in 2010, demonstrating improved reporting timeliness. Data quality from most reactions was adequate, with 10% (45 of 442) misclassified transfusion-associated circulatory overload reactions, and no incomplete transfusion-transmitted infection data reported from 2010 to 2013. When compared to the Baystate system to assess concordance, 43% (24 of 56) of NHSN-reported febrile reactions were captured in both systems (unweighted kappa value, 0.47; confidence interval, 0.33-0.61).
CONCLUSION: Since the 2010 HM pilot, improvements have led to enhanced simplicity, timeliness, and strengthened data quality. The HM serves an important and unique role despite incomplete adoption nationwide. Facility efforts to track and prevent transfusion-associated adverse events through systems like the NHSN HM are a key step toward improving transfusion safety in the United States.
© 2018 AABB.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30427540      PMCID: PMC6365173          DOI: 10.1111/trf.15008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transfusion        ISSN: 0041-1132            Impact factor:   3.157


  19 in total

Review 1.  The Canadian Transfusion Surveillance System: what is it and how can the data be used?

Authors:  Julie Ditomasso; Yang Liu; Nancy M Heddle
Journal:  Transfus Apher Sci       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 1.764

2.  Apheresis platelets are more frequently associated with adverse reactions than pooled platelets both in recipients and in donors: a study from French hemovigilance data.

Authors:  Aurélien Daurat; Claire Roger; JeanChristophe Gris; Gérald Daurat; Michel Feissel; Yannick Le Manach; JeanYves Lefrant; Laurent Muller
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2016-01-26       Impact factor: 3.157

3.  Worldwide overview of existing haemovigilance systems.

Authors:  Jean-Claude Faber
Journal:  Transfus Apher Sci       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.764

4.  Updated guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems: recommendations from the Guidelines Working Group.

Authors:  R R German; L M Lee; J M Horan; R L Milstein; C A Pertowski; M N Waller
Journal:  MMWR Recomm Rep       Date:  2001-07-27

Review 5.  Surveillance of blood transfusion safety: contribution of the hemovigilance strategy in France.

Authors:  P Morel; P Hervé
Journal:  Transfus Med Rev       Date:  1998-04

6.  Enhancing platelet transfusion safety: not a one-size-fits-all approach.

Authors:  Nora Ratcliffe; Nancy M Dunbar; Charles I Brown
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.157

7.  Benefit of transfusion-related acute lung injury risk-minimization measures--German haemovigilance data (2006-2010).

Authors:  M B Funk; S Guenay; A Lohmann; O Henseler; M Heiden; K M O Hanschmann; B Keller-Stanislawski
Journal:  Vox Sang       Date:  2011-10-04       Impact factor: 2.144

8.  Declining blood collection and utilization in the United States.

Authors:  Koo-Whang Chung; Sridhar V Basavaraju; Yi Mu; Katharina L van Santen; Kathryn A Haass; Richard Henry; James Berger; Matthew J Kuehnert
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 3.157

9.  Incidence and pattern of 12 years of reported transfusion adverse events in Zimbabwe: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Nyashadzaishe Mafirakureva; Star Khoza; David A Mvere; McLeod E Chitiyo; Maarten J Postma; Marinus Van Hulst
Journal:  Blood Transfus       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 3.443

10.  Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic.

Authors:  Mary L McHugh
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.313

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  A Comparison of Transfusion-Related Adverse Reactions Among Apheresis Platelets, Whole Blood-Derived Platelets, and Platelets Subjected to Pathogen Reduction Technology as Reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network Hemovigilance Module.

Authors:  Sanjida J Mowla; Ian T Kracalik; Mathew R P Sapiano; Lynne O'Hearn; Chester Andrzejewski; Sridhar V Basavaraju
Journal:  Transfus Med Rev       Date:  2021-04-02

2.  Amino acid substitutions at sugar-recognizing codons confer ABO blood group system-related α1,3 Gal(NAc) transferases with differential enzymatic activity.

Authors:  Emili Cid; Miyako Yamamoto; Fumiichiro Yamamoto
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 3.  Point-of-Care Diagnostics in Coagulation Management.

Authors:  Sebastian D Sahli; Julian Rössler; David W Tscholl; Jan-Dirk Studt; Donat R Spahn; Alexander Kaserer
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 3.576

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.