发展中经济体的血液和出血管理:观念、准备和不断发展的实践

Anurag Kumar Mishra, Atul K. Agarwal, Ajay Gandhi
{"title":"发展中经济体的血液和出血管理:观念、准备和不断发展的实践","authors":"Anurag Kumar Mishra, Atul K. Agarwal, Ajay Gandhi","doi":"10.25259/jccc_24s1_ag1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nThe growing concerns around the judicious use of blood components have paved the way for the dissemination of awareness around the best practices related to the use of this precious resource. With the World Health Organization issuing a policy brief on the urgent implementation of Patient Blood Management (PBM), there has been an accelerated impetus within the healthcare ecosystem to imbibe and implement the principles and practices of PBM. This research work aims to understand the current level of understanding, adequacy, and appropriateness of practices and readiness toward the universal and standardized implementation of PBM.\n\n\n\nThis article summarizes the findings of an online survey. The survey consisted of a Google Form questionnaire with responses in multiple-choice, open and closed ends, as well as short notes. The survey responses were analyzed and summed up graphically. The survey established that there is still a huge gap in the “multispecialty approach” to setting up of the safe tolerance limits to anemia, optimal cutoffs, and thresholds for transfusion and shifting focus from “blood product” safety to “patient” safety.\n\n\n\nA lot of guidance- and evidence-based recommendations on transfusion practices are available in developed economies; the developing world still continues to weigh the advantages against the availability of and access to resources needed for implementation. Within these economies, and among different strata of healthcare infrastructure, there is still a significant difference in the perceptions and practices around blood transfusion and bleeding management.\n","PeriodicalId":34567,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiac Critical Care TSS","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blood and Bleeding Management in Developing Economies: Perceptions, Preparedness, and the Evolving Practices\",\"authors\":\"Anurag Kumar Mishra, Atul K. Agarwal, Ajay Gandhi\",\"doi\":\"10.25259/jccc_24s1_ag1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\nThe growing concerns around the judicious use of blood components have paved the way for the dissemination of awareness around the best practices related to the use of this precious resource. With the World Health Organization issuing a policy brief on the urgent implementation of Patient Blood Management (PBM), there has been an accelerated impetus within the healthcare ecosystem to imbibe and implement the principles and practices of PBM. This research work aims to understand the current level of understanding, adequacy, and appropriateness of practices and readiness toward the universal and standardized implementation of PBM.\\n\\n\\n\\nThis article summarizes the findings of an online survey. The survey consisted of a Google Form questionnaire with responses in multiple-choice, open and closed ends, as well as short notes. The survey responses were analyzed and summed up graphically. The survey established that there is still a huge gap in the “multispecialty approach” to setting up of the safe tolerance limits to anemia, optimal cutoffs, and thresholds for transfusion and shifting focus from “blood product” safety to “patient” safety.\\n\\n\\n\\nA lot of guidance- and evidence-based recommendations on transfusion practices are available in developed economies; the developing world still continues to weigh the advantages against the availability of and access to resources needed for implementation. Within these economies, and among different strata of healthcare infrastructure, there is still a significant difference in the perceptions and practices around blood transfusion and bleeding management.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":34567,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cardiac Critical Care TSS\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cardiac Critical Care TSS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25259/jccc_24s1_ag1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiac Critical Care TSS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/jccc_24s1_ag1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们对合理使用血液成分的关注与日俱增,这为宣传与使用这一宝贵资源相关的最佳实践铺平了道路。随着世界卫生组织发布了一份关于紧急实施患者血液管理(PBM)的政策简报,加速推动了医疗保健生态系统吸收和实施患者血液管理的原则和实践。本文总结了一项在线调查的结果。调查由谷歌表格问卷和简短注释组成,问卷包含多项选择、开放式和封闭式回答。对调查回答进行了分析,并以图表形式进行了总结。调查结果显示,在 "多专业方法 "方面仍存在巨大差距,即设定贫血的安全耐受限度、最佳临界值和输血阈值,并将重点从 "血液制品 "安全转移到 "患者 "安全。在这些经济体中,以及在医疗基础设施的不同阶层中,人们对输血和出血管理的认识和实践仍存在很大差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Blood and Bleeding Management in Developing Economies: Perceptions, Preparedness, and the Evolving Practices
The growing concerns around the judicious use of blood components have paved the way for the dissemination of awareness around the best practices related to the use of this precious resource. With the World Health Organization issuing a policy brief on the urgent implementation of Patient Blood Management (PBM), there has been an accelerated impetus within the healthcare ecosystem to imbibe and implement the principles and practices of PBM. This research work aims to understand the current level of understanding, adequacy, and appropriateness of practices and readiness toward the universal and standardized implementation of PBM. This article summarizes the findings of an online survey. The survey consisted of a Google Form questionnaire with responses in multiple-choice, open and closed ends, as well as short notes. The survey responses were analyzed and summed up graphically. The survey established that there is still a huge gap in the “multispecialty approach” to setting up of the safe tolerance limits to anemia, optimal cutoffs, and thresholds for transfusion and shifting focus from “blood product” safety to “patient” safety. A lot of guidance- and evidence-based recommendations on transfusion practices are available in developed economies; the developing world still continues to weigh the advantages against the availability of and access to resources needed for implementation. Within these economies, and among different strata of healthcare infrastructure, there is still a significant difference in the perceptions and practices around blood transfusion and bleeding management.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊最新文献
Prognostic Cardiac Biomarkers and Tetralogy of Fallot Score: Do they Predict Outcomes in Intracardiac Tetralogy of Fallot Repair? The Anesthesiologist as Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Intensivist: Heralding a New Era? Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Nursing Care A Bibliometric Study on Junctional Ectopic Tachycardia: Time and Trends have much to Tell! Evaluation of Right Ventricular Function in Patients Undergoing Mitral Valve Replacement with Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure of more than 50 mmHg: A Prospective Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1