[Transfusion reactions in patients: haemovigilance reports to the Dutch National Haemovigilance Office in 2003]
- PMID: 16355575
[Transfusion reactions in patients: haemovigilance reports to the Dutch National Haemovigilance Office in 2003]
Abstract
Objective: National registration and analysis of unexpected side effects and incidents associated with blood transfusion (together termed 'transfusion reactions') in 2003 in order to arrive at recommendations to improve safety in the transfusion chain.
Design: Observational
Method: A uniform national reporting form with definitions and a reporting manual were sent to all Dutch hospitals in the spring of 2003 with the request to report transfusion reactions retroactively to January 2003 to the Dutch National Haemovigilance Office 'Transfusion reactions in patients' (TRIP). TRIP is an independent organisation managed by representatives of professional societies that are involved in blood transfusion. Each hospital was given a reporting code. The reports were in principle voluntary and anonymous with regard to both the patient and the attending physician. Transfusion reactions were assessed for severity as well as for the level of probability with which they could be ascribed to the transfusion.
Results: Reports were received from 82 (80%) of the hospitals; 9 hospitals informed the TRIP explicitly that there had been no transfusion reactions in 2003. A total of 267 reports were received. Of these, 803 (63%) were graded for severity and of these 803, 52 (6%) were grade 2 ('moderate to severe morbidity') or worse. In the categories involving possible infectious complications, there were 2 reports of bacterial contamination that were judged, on review, to be due 'with certainty' to the transfusion. 34 reports concerned transfusion of the wrong blood product, resulting in a total of 9 transfusion reactions (4 of grade 2). The total number of reports concerning 2003 was 1.6/1000 blood products.
Conclusion: The participation by the hospitals was high in the first year of national reporting, 2003. Most of the reports were of non-serious reactions known to be possible side effects of blood transfusion; 52 reports were rated as grade 2 or worse.
Comment in
-
[The practice guideline 'Blood transfusion' (third integral revision)].Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2005 Nov 19;149(47):2613-8. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2005. PMID: 16355573 Review. Dutch.
Similar articles
-
[Reports of transfusion incidents: experiences from the first year of hemovigilance in the region of the former ZWN (South West Netherlands) blood bank in Rotterdam].Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2003 Aug 2;147(31):1508-12. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2003. PMID: 12924082 Dutch.
-
The French haemovigilance system.Vox Sang. 1998;74 Suppl 2:441-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1423-0410.1998.tb05454.x. Vox Sang. 1998. PMID: 9704479 Review.
-
6 Years of shot reporting--its influence on UK blood safety.Transfus Apher Sci. 2004 Oct;31(2):123-31. doi: 10.1016/j.transci.2004.07.006. Transfus Apher Sci. 2004. PMID: 15501416
-
The French Haemovigilance System: organization and results for 2003.Transfus Apher Sci. 2004 Oct;31(2):145-53. doi: 10.1016/j.transci.2004.07.010. Transfus Apher Sci. 2004. PMID: 15501418
-
[Blood transfusion surveillance: organization and results].Rev Prat. 2001 Jun 30;51(12):1332-6. Rev Prat. 2001. PMID: 11503507 Review. French.
Cited by
-
Transition from fresh frozen plasma to solvent/detergent plasma in the Netherlands: comparing clinical use and transfusion reaction risks.Haematologica. 2020 Apr;105(4):1158-1165. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2019.222083. Epub 2019 Jul 4. Haematologica. 2020. PMID: 31273090 Free PMC article.
-
The Evolving Role of Information Technology in Haemovigilance Systems.J Healthc Eng. 2018 Mar 8;2018:6183468. doi: 10.1155/2018/6183468. eCollection 2018. J Healthc Eng. 2018. PMID: 29707185 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Medical