Reducing unnecessary preoperative blood orders and costs by implementing an updated institution-specific maximum surgical blood order schedule and a remote electronic blood release system

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Using blood utilization data acquired from the anesthesia information management system, an updated institutionspecific maximum surgical blood order schedule was introduced. The authors evaluated whether the maximum surgical blood order schedule, along with a remote electronic blood release system, reduced unnecessary preoperative blood orders and costs. Methods: At a large academic medical center, data for preoperative blood orders were analyzed for 63,916 surgical patients over a 34-month period. The new maximum surgical blood order schedule and the electronic blood release system (Hemosafe ®; Haemonetics Corp., Braintree, MA) were introduced mid-way through this time period. The authors assessed whether these interventions led to reductions in unnecessary preoperative orders and associated costs. Results: Among patients having surgical procedures deemed not to require a type and screen or crossmatch (n = 33,216), the percent of procedures with preoperative blood orders decreased by 38% (from 40.4% [7,167 of 17,740 patients] to 25.0% [3,869 of 15,476 patients], P <0.001). Among all hospitalized inpatients, the crossmatch-to-transfusion ratio decreased by 27% (from 2.11 to 1.54; P <0.001) over the same time period. The proportion of patients who required emergency release uncrossmatched blood increased from 2.2 to 3.1 per 1,000 patients (P = 0.03); however, most of these patients were having emergency surgery. Based on the realized reductions in blood orders, annual costs were reduced by $137,223 ($6.08 per patient) for surgical patients, and by $298,966 ($6.20/patient) for all hospitalized patients. Conclusion: Implementing institution-specific, updated maximum surgical blood order schedule-directed preoperative blood ordering guidelines along with an electronic blood release system results in a substantial reduction in unnecessary orders and costs, with a clinically insignificant increase in requirement for emergency release blood transfusions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)501-509
Number of pages9
JournalAnesthesiology
Volume121
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Appointments and Schedules
Costs and Cost Analysis
Emergencies
Management Information Systems
Preoperative Care
Blood Transfusion
Inpatients
Anesthesia
Guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

@article{c2e131a0944b420aaa6e32c121b626ed,
title = "Reducing unnecessary preoperative blood orders and costs by implementing an updated institution-specific maximum surgical blood order schedule and a remote electronic blood release system",
abstract = "Background: Using blood utilization data acquired from the anesthesia information management system, an updated institutionspecific maximum surgical blood order schedule was introduced. The authors evaluated whether the maximum surgical blood order schedule, along with a remote electronic blood release system, reduced unnecessary preoperative blood orders and costs. Methods: At a large academic medical center, data for preoperative blood orders were analyzed for 63,916 surgical patients over a 34-month period. The new maximum surgical blood order schedule and the electronic blood release system (Hemosafe {\circledR}; Haemonetics Corp., Braintree, MA) were introduced mid-way through this time period. The authors assessed whether these interventions led to reductions in unnecessary preoperative orders and associated costs. Results: Among patients having surgical procedures deemed not to require a type and screen or crossmatch (n = 33,216), the percent of procedures with preoperative blood orders decreased by 38{\%} (from 40.4{\%} [7,167 of 17,740 patients] to 25.0{\%} [3,869 of 15,476 patients], P <0.001). Among all hospitalized inpatients, the crossmatch-to-transfusion ratio decreased by 27{\%} (from 2.11 to 1.54; P <0.001) over the same time period. The proportion of patients who required emergency release uncrossmatched blood increased from 2.2 to 3.1 per 1,000 patients (P = 0.03); however, most of these patients were having emergency surgery. Based on the realized reductions in blood orders, annual costs were reduced by $137,223 ($6.08 per patient) for surgical patients, and by $298,966 ($6.20/patient) for all hospitalized patients. Conclusion: Implementing institution-specific, updated maximum surgical blood order schedule-directed preoperative blood ordering guidelines along with an electronic blood release system results in a substantial reduction in unnecessary orders and costs, with a clinically insignificant increase in requirement for emergency release blood transfusions.",
author = "Frank, {Steven Mark} and Oleyar, {Michael J.} and Ness, {Paul Michael} and Tobian, {Aaron A}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1097/ALN.0000000000000338",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "121",
pages = "501--509",
journal = "Anesthesiology",
issn = "0003-3022",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reducing unnecessary preoperative blood orders and costs by implementing an updated institution-specific maximum surgical blood order schedule and a remote electronic blood release system

AU - Frank, Steven Mark

AU - Oleyar, Michael J.

AU - Ness, Paul Michael

AU - Tobian, Aaron A

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background: Using blood utilization data acquired from the anesthesia information management system, an updated institutionspecific maximum surgical blood order schedule was introduced. The authors evaluated whether the maximum surgical blood order schedule, along with a remote electronic blood release system, reduced unnecessary preoperative blood orders and costs. Methods: At a large academic medical center, data for preoperative blood orders were analyzed for 63,916 surgical patients over a 34-month period. The new maximum surgical blood order schedule and the electronic blood release system (Hemosafe ®; Haemonetics Corp., Braintree, MA) were introduced mid-way through this time period. The authors assessed whether these interventions led to reductions in unnecessary preoperative orders and associated costs. Results: Among patients having surgical procedures deemed not to require a type and screen or crossmatch (n = 33,216), the percent of procedures with preoperative blood orders decreased by 38% (from 40.4% [7,167 of 17,740 patients] to 25.0% [3,869 of 15,476 patients], P <0.001). Among all hospitalized inpatients, the crossmatch-to-transfusion ratio decreased by 27% (from 2.11 to 1.54; P <0.001) over the same time period. The proportion of patients who required emergency release uncrossmatched blood increased from 2.2 to 3.1 per 1,000 patients (P = 0.03); however, most of these patients were having emergency surgery. Based on the realized reductions in blood orders, annual costs were reduced by $137,223 ($6.08 per patient) for surgical patients, and by $298,966 ($6.20/patient) for all hospitalized patients. Conclusion: Implementing institution-specific, updated maximum surgical blood order schedule-directed preoperative blood ordering guidelines along with an electronic blood release system results in a substantial reduction in unnecessary orders and costs, with a clinically insignificant increase in requirement for emergency release blood transfusions.

AB - Background: Using blood utilization data acquired from the anesthesia information management system, an updated institutionspecific maximum surgical blood order schedule was introduced. The authors evaluated whether the maximum surgical blood order schedule, along with a remote electronic blood release system, reduced unnecessary preoperative blood orders and costs. Methods: At a large academic medical center, data for preoperative blood orders were analyzed for 63,916 surgical patients over a 34-month period. The new maximum surgical blood order schedule and the electronic blood release system (Hemosafe ®; Haemonetics Corp., Braintree, MA) were introduced mid-way through this time period. The authors assessed whether these interventions led to reductions in unnecessary preoperative orders and associated costs. Results: Among patients having surgical procedures deemed not to require a type and screen or crossmatch (n = 33,216), the percent of procedures with preoperative blood orders decreased by 38% (from 40.4% [7,167 of 17,740 patients] to 25.0% [3,869 of 15,476 patients], P <0.001). Among all hospitalized inpatients, the crossmatch-to-transfusion ratio decreased by 27% (from 2.11 to 1.54; P <0.001) over the same time period. The proportion of patients who required emergency release uncrossmatched blood increased from 2.2 to 3.1 per 1,000 patients (P = 0.03); however, most of these patients were having emergency surgery. Based on the realized reductions in blood orders, annual costs were reduced by $137,223 ($6.08 per patient) for surgical patients, and by $298,966 ($6.20/patient) for all hospitalized patients. Conclusion: Implementing institution-specific, updated maximum surgical blood order schedule-directed preoperative blood ordering guidelines along with an electronic blood release system results in a substantial reduction in unnecessary orders and costs, with a clinically insignificant increase in requirement for emergency release blood transfusions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921672331&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921672331&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000338

DO - 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000338

M3 - Article

VL - 121

SP - 501

EP - 509

JO - Anesthesiology

JF - Anesthesiology

SN - 0003-3022

IS - 3

ER -