Patient Harm from Repetitive Blood Draws and Blood Waste in the ICU: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Frequent blood testing in the intensive care unit (ICU) is instrumental to patient diagnosis, monitoring, and titration of invasive therapies. However, there is a growing appreciation that a significant proportion of ICU blood tests are reflexive and unnecessary.1,2 Serial phlebotomy is associated with extended hospital length of stay and acquired anemia in the general hospital population.3 Since patients in the ICU are prone to developing anemia,4,5 they are likely at increased risk of harm from serial phlebotomy. In response, multiple recent campaigns advocate for physician restraint in laboratory test ordering.6,7 However, relatively little is known about the effect of excessive phlebotomy on outcomes in critically ill patients. Better understanding of ICU phlebotomy practices, and harms associated with serial testing, is important in planning, implementing, and evaluating phlebotomy reduction interventions. Objectives: 1) Quantify average daily phlebotomy volume for ICU patients including blood discarded as waste when accessing vascular devices. 2) Identify if average daily phlebotomy volume is an independent risk factor for ICU acquired anemia (hemoglobin < 80 g/L) or the need for red blood cell transfusion. 3) Explore the relationship between daily phlebotomy volume and hospital mortality. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study at an academic tertiary care center in Toronto, Ontario, utilizing hospital administrative data, laboratory data, and select chart review. Index Medical Surgical ICU admissions between September 2014 and August 2015 with an ICU stay of three days or greater were included. Major bleeding events were defined as a hemoglobin drop of 30 g/L within a 24 hour period. Average daily phlebotomy volumes were calculated using the number of samples received by the lab multiplied by standard blood volumes required for each sample type. A bedside prospective audit was conducted in March 2018 to quantify average blood volume discarded as waste during phlebotomy. Blood discard/waste data were summarized with descriptive statistics, but not included in further analysis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to study the association between average daily phlebotomy volume and each of: nadir hemoglobin (< 80 g/L), the need for red blood cell transfusion, and hospital mortality. Patients with a major bleeding event were excluded from the regression. Control variables included sex, age, ICU length of stay, admission hemoglobin, and admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. Results: There were a total of 525 index patient admissions, mean age 62.1 yr, 41% female (Table 1). Fifty-two (52) patients had a major bleeding event in the ICU. Mean phlebotomy volume per patient day was 28.3 mL (95% CI 27.4 - 29.1 mL, stdev 10.1 mL). Mean bedside waste during the phlebotomy audit (total of 144 blood draws) varied by vascular access: 3.9 mL for arterial, 5.5 mL for central venous, and 6.25 mL for peripherally inserted catheters. The mean estimated daily bedside waste for phlebotomy was 14.8 mL per patient day. Outcomes of logistical regression, excluding patients with major bleeding events, are summarized in Table 2. Average daily phlebotomy volume (mL) was predictive of nadir hemoglobin < 80 g/L (parameter estimate 0.091, p <0.001), the need for red blood cell transfusion (0.092, p<0.001), and inpatient mortality (0.053, <0.001). For every 5 mL increase in average daily phlebotomy, the odds ratio (OR) for nadir hemoglobin < 80 g/L was 1.58 (95% CI 1.31 - 1.90) and the OR for a red cell transfusion was 1.58 (95% CI 1.33 - 1.87). Conclusion: Daily ICU phlebotomy volume is associated with ICU acquired anemia and the need for red blood cell transfusion, including in a multivariable model with patient demographics, major bleeding events, and severity of illness as estimated by day 1 SOFA score. However, the ICU admission SOFA score was only weakly predictive of mortality, and the unexpected association between average daily phlebotomy and mortality needs to be further explored. It is possible that in this data set day 1 SOFA score did not completely control for severity of illness. Our findings support the need for ongoing phlebotomy stewardship interventions in the ICU. We suggest ICU acquired anemia and the need for red blood cell transfusion are appropriate patient outcome measures to evaluate stewardship interventions. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».