BACKGROUND: Optimizing preoperative anemia is a required component of the Joint Commission Patient Blood Management Certification and an important component of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. OBJECTIVE: To describe a preoperative anemia protocol developed and implemented at the Kaiser Permanente San Jose Medical Center in California to facilitate preoperative identification and treatment of anemia. METHODS: The protocol included all operations at risk of causing substantial blood loss. It excluded emergent operations and those for which the patient had a normal last hemoglobin value within the prior 12 months unless newly developed anemia was suspected. Eligible patients were screened for laboratory evaluation, and those with anemia were treated for reversible causes. Consistency was ensured by physician, staff, and patient education, and by use of electronic health records. Administration of intravenous iron and erythropoietin and consultation with specialists were expedited as part of a management algorithm. RESULTS: Among 510 patients enrolled during 1 year, 442 (87%) received anemia screening laboratory tests. Half of those with laboratory results were eligible for further optimization: 207 had anemia and 21 had iron deficiency without anemia. Among the 228 patients eligible for optimization, 189 (83%) had anemia addressed preoperatively. Of 129 patients with iron deficiency anemia, 102 (79%) received intravenous iron preoperatively, with a mean preoperative increase in hemoglobin level by 0.98 g/dL (n = 79). CONCLUSION: Integration of specialty services, optimization of technology, and consistency across practitioners were crucial for successful implementation and sustainability of a preoperative anemia protocol developed to expedite and enhance best practices.
BACKGROUND: Optimizing preoperative anemia is a required component of the Joint Commission Patient Blood Management Certification and an important component of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. OBJECTIVE: To describe a preoperative anemia protocol developed and implemented at the Kaiser Permanente San Jose Medical Center in California to facilitate preoperative identification and treatment of anemia. METHODS: The protocol included all operations at risk of causing substantial blood loss. It excluded emergent operations and those for which the patient had a normal last hemoglobin value within the prior 12 months unless newly developed anemia was suspected. Eligible patients were screened for laboratory evaluation, and those with anemia were treated for reversible causes. Consistency was ensured by physician, staff, and patient education, and by use of electronic health records. Administration of intravenous iron and erythropoietin and consultation with specialists were expedited as part of a management algorithm. RESULTS: Among 510 patients enrolled during 1 year, 442 (87%) received anemia screening laboratory tests. Half of those with laboratory results were eligible for further optimization: 207 had anemia and 21 had iron deficiency without anemia. Among the 228 patients eligible for optimization, 189 (83%) had anemia addressed preoperatively. Of 129 patients with iron deficiency anemia, 102 (79%) received intravenous iron preoperatively, with a mean preoperative increase in hemoglobin level by 0.98 g/dL (n = 79). CONCLUSION: Integration of specialty services, optimization of technology, and consistency across practitioners were crucial for successful implementation and sustainability of a preoperative anemia protocol developed to expedite and enhance best practices.
Authors: Jeffrey L Carson; Michael L Terrin; Helaine Noveck; David W Sanders; Bernard R Chaitman; George G Rhoads; George Nemo; Karen Dragert; Lauren Beaupre; Kevin Hildebrand; William Macaulay; Courtland Lewis; Donald Richard Cook; Gwendolyn Dobbin; Khwaja J Zakriya; Fred S Apple; Rebecca A Horney; Jay Magaziner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nicole R Guinn; Jason R Guercio; Thomas J Hopkins; Aime Grimsley; Dinesh J Kurian; Maria I Jimenez; Michael P Bolognesi; Rebecca Schroeder; Solomon Aronson Journal: Transfusion Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: P C Hébert; G Wells; M A Blajchman; J Marshall; C Martin; G Pagliarello; M Tweeddale; I Schweitzer; E Yetisir Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-02-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Khaled M Musallam; Hani M Tamim; Toby Richards; Donat R Spahn; Frits R Rosendaal; Aida Habbal; Mohammad Khreiss; Fadi S Dahdaleh; Kaivan Khavandi; Pierre M Sfeir; Assaad Soweid; Jamal J Hoballah; Ali T Taher; Faek R Jamali Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: L T Goodnough; A Maniatis; P Earnshaw; G Benoni; P Beris; E Bisbe; D A Fergusson; H Gombotz; O Habler; T G Monk; Y Ozier; R Slappendel; M Szpalski Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: D M Baron; H Hochrieser; M Posch; B Metnitz; A Rhodes; R P Moreno; R M Pearse; P Metnitz Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2014-05-14 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: Bernd Froessler; Peter Palm; Ingo Weber; Nicolette A Hodyl; Rajvinder Singh; Elizabeth M Murphy Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Richard H Parrish; Heather Monk Bodenstab; Dustin Carneal; Ryan M Cassity; William E Dager; Sara J Hyland; Jenna K Lovely; Alyssa Pollock; Tracy M Sparkes; Siu-Fun Wong Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-09-24 Impact factor: 4.964