Tori Lenet , Joseph Tropiano , Stephanie Skanes , Victoria Ivankovic , Michael Verret , Daniel I McIsaac , Alan Tinmouth , Stuart G Nicholls , Andrea M Patey , Dean A Fergusson , Guillaume Martel
{"title":"了解术中输血决策的可变性:一项定性研究","authors":"Tori Lenet , Joseph Tropiano , Stephanie Skanes , Victoria Ivankovic , Michael Verret , Daniel I McIsaac , Alan Tinmouth , Stuart G Nicholls , Andrea M Patey , Dean A Fergusson , Guillaume Martel","doi":"10.1016/j.tmrv.2023.150726","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There is evidence of significant intraoperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion variability that cannot be explained by case-mix, and may reflect unwarranted transfusions. The objective was to explore the source of intraoperative RBC transfusion variability by eliciting the beliefs of anesthesiologists and surgeons that underlie transfusion decisions. Interviews based on the Theoretical Domains Framework were conducted to identify beliefs about intraoperative transfusion. Content analysis was performed to group statements into domains. Relevant domains were selected based on frequency of beliefs, perceived influence on transfusion, and the presence of conflicting beliefs within domains. Of the 28 transfusion experts recruited internationally (16 anesthesiologists, 12 surgeons), 24 (86%) were Canadian or American and 11 (39%) identified as female. Eight relevant domains were identified: (1) <em>Knowledge</em> (insufficient evidence to guide intraoperative transfusion), (2) <em>Social/professional role and identity</em> (surgeons/anesthesiologists share responsibility for transfusions), (3) <em>Beliefs about consequences</em> (concerns about morbidity of transfusion/anemia), (4) <em>Environmental context/resources</em> (transfusions influenced by type of surgery, local blood supply, cost of transfusion), (5) <em>Social influences</em> (institutional culture, judgment by peers, surgeon-anesthesiologist relationship, patient preference influencing transfusion decisions), (6) <em>Behavioral regulation</em> (need for intraoperative transfusion guidelines, usefulness of audits and educational sessions to guide transfusion), (7) <em>Nature of the behaviors</em> (overtransfusion remains commonplace, transfusion practice becoming more restrictive over time), and (8) <em>Memory, attention, and decision processes</em> (various patient and operative characteristics are incorporated into transfusion decisions). This study identified a range of factors underlying intraoperative transfusion decision-making and partly explain the variability in transfusion behavior. Targeted theory-informed behavior-change interventions derived from this work could help reduce intraoperative transfusion variability.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56081,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion Medicine Reviews","volume":"37 2","pages":"Article 150726"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding Intraoperative Transfusion Decision-Making Variability: A Qualitative Study\",\"authors\":\"Tori Lenet , Joseph Tropiano , Stephanie Skanes , Victoria Ivankovic , Michael Verret , Daniel I McIsaac , Alan Tinmouth , Stuart G Nicholls , Andrea M Patey , Dean A Fergusson , Guillaume Martel\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tmrv.2023.150726\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>There is evidence of significant intraoperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion variability that cannot be explained by case-mix, and may reflect unwarranted transfusions. The objective was to explore the source of intraoperative RBC transfusion variability by eliciting the beliefs of anesthesiologists and surgeons that underlie transfusion decisions. Interviews based on the Theoretical Domains Framework were conducted to identify beliefs about intraoperative transfusion. Content analysis was performed to group statements into domains. Relevant domains were selected based on frequency of beliefs, perceived influence on transfusion, and the presence of conflicting beliefs within domains. Of the 28 transfusion experts recruited internationally (16 anesthesiologists, 12 surgeons), 24 (86%) were Canadian or American and 11 (39%) identified as female. Eight relevant domains were identified: (1) <em>Knowledge</em> (insufficient evidence to guide intraoperative transfusion), (2) <em>Social/professional role and identity</em> (surgeons/anesthesiologists share responsibility for transfusions), (3) <em>Beliefs about consequences</em> (concerns about morbidity of transfusion/anemia), (4) <em>Environmental context/resources</em> (transfusions influenced by type of surgery, local blood supply, cost of transfusion), (5) <em>Social influences</em> (institutional culture, judgment by peers, surgeon-anesthesiologist relationship, patient preference influencing transfusion decisions), (6) <em>Behavioral regulation</em> (need for intraoperative transfusion guidelines, usefulness of audits and educational sessions to guide transfusion), (7) <em>Nature of the behaviors</em> (overtransfusion remains commonplace, transfusion practice becoming more restrictive over time), and (8) <em>Memory, attention, and decision processes</em> (various patient and operative characteristics are incorporated into transfusion decisions). This study identified a range of factors underlying intraoperative transfusion decision-making and partly explain the variability in transfusion behavior. Targeted theory-informed behavior-change interventions derived from this work could help reduce intraoperative transfusion variability.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transfusion Medicine Reviews\",\"volume\":\"37 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 150726\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transfusion Medicine Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887796323000160\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion Medicine Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887796323000160","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Understanding Intraoperative Transfusion Decision-Making Variability: A Qualitative Study
There is evidence of significant intraoperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion variability that cannot be explained by case-mix, and may reflect unwarranted transfusions. The objective was to explore the source of intraoperative RBC transfusion variability by eliciting the beliefs of anesthesiologists and surgeons that underlie transfusion decisions. Interviews based on the Theoretical Domains Framework were conducted to identify beliefs about intraoperative transfusion. Content analysis was performed to group statements into domains. Relevant domains were selected based on frequency of beliefs, perceived influence on transfusion, and the presence of conflicting beliefs within domains. Of the 28 transfusion experts recruited internationally (16 anesthesiologists, 12 surgeons), 24 (86%) were Canadian or American and 11 (39%) identified as female. Eight relevant domains were identified: (1) Knowledge (insufficient evidence to guide intraoperative transfusion), (2) Social/professional role and identity (surgeons/anesthesiologists share responsibility for transfusions), (3) Beliefs about consequences (concerns about morbidity of transfusion/anemia), (4) Environmental context/resources (transfusions influenced by type of surgery, local blood supply, cost of transfusion), (5) Social influences (institutional culture, judgment by peers, surgeon-anesthesiologist relationship, patient preference influencing transfusion decisions), (6) Behavioral regulation (need for intraoperative transfusion guidelines, usefulness of audits and educational sessions to guide transfusion), (7) Nature of the behaviors (overtransfusion remains commonplace, transfusion practice becoming more restrictive over time), and (8) Memory, attention, and decision processes (various patient and operative characteristics are incorporated into transfusion decisions). This study identified a range of factors underlying intraoperative transfusion decision-making and partly explain the variability in transfusion behavior. Targeted theory-informed behavior-change interventions derived from this work could help reduce intraoperative transfusion variability.
期刊介绍:
Transfusion Medicine Reviews provides an international forum in English for the publication of scholarly work devoted to the various sub-disciplines that comprise Transfusion Medicine including hemostasis and thrombosis and cellular therapies. The scope of the journal encompasses basic science, practical aspects, laboratory developments, clinical indications, and adverse effects.