Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Evaluation Tool for Assessing a Newly Implemented Massive Transfusion Protocol

*Corresponding author for this work
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Abstract

Exsanguination requires massive blood product replacement and termination of the bleeding source to prevent hemorrhagic shock and death. Massive transfusion protocols (MTPs) are algorithms that allow the health care team to quickly stabilize the bleeding patient and guide blood product administration. However, no national MTP guidelines or a standardized evaluation tool exist for collecting and reporting MTP-related data. The purpose of this article is to describe an original MTP evaluation tool, how it was used, barriers encountered, and a framework for reporting the MTP evaluation data. The evidence-based Broxton MTP Evaluation Tool was developed to evaluate the use of a newly implemented MTP via a retrospective review of electronic medical records (EMRs). Although the instrument itself worked well, barriers were encountered while reviewing the EMRs for the MTP evaluation. These barriers included no institutional entity was charged with tracking MTP activations, no searchable database was established to collect data concerning the MTP-activated patients, and no standard location in the EMR was designated for documenting the MTP activation. When devising protocols such as an MTP, a priori strategies should be developed for its implementation, documentation, and evaluation. Research is needed to determine best practices for evaluating an MTP to ensure positive patient outcomes with this protocol.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 164-169 (6 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Journal of Trauma Nursing (Volume 24, Issue 3)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 2017

Publication status

Published - 2017

ISSN

1078-7496

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85019872906
  • PubMed: 28486321

Publication metrics

Metrics

SciVal
FWCI
1.06
SciVal
Author count
3
SciVal
citations
6
SciVal
Paper percentile
64
Scopus
citations
Fractional count
2
Fractional count
0.67
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.33
Fractional count
2
Fractional count
1

PlumX, opens in new tab

Citation count
9
Captures
34