Benefits of VISION Max automated cross-matching in comparison with manual cross-matching: A multidimensional analysis
Hee-Jung Chung,
Mina Hur,
Sang Gyeu Choi,
Hyun-Kyung Lee,
Seungho Lee,
Hanah Kim,
Hee-Won Moon and
Yeo-Min Yun
PLOS ONE, 2019, vol. 14, issue 12, 1-13
Abstract:
Background: VISION Max (Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Raritan, NJ, USA) is a newly introduced automated blood bank system. Cross-matching (XM) is an important test confirming safety by simulating reaction between packed Red Blood Cells (RBCs) and patient blood in vitro before transfusion. We assessed the benefits of VISION Max automated XM (A-XM) in comparison with those of manual XM (M-XM) by using multidimensional analysis (cost-effectiveness and quality improvement). Materials and methods: In a total of 327 tests (130 patients), results from A-XM and M-XM were compared. We assessed the concordance rate, risk priority number (RPN), turnaround time, hands-on time, and the costs of both methods. We further simulated their annual effects based on 37,937 XM tests in 2018. Results: The concordance rate between A-XM and M-XM was 97.9% (320/327, kappa = 0.83), and the seven discordant results were incompatible for transfusion in A-XM, while compatible for transfusion in M-XM. None of the results was incompatible for transfusion in A-XM, while compatible for transfusion in M-XM, meaning A-XM detect agglutination more sensitively and consequently provides a more safe result than M-XM. A-XM was estimated to have a 6.3-fold lower risk (229 vs. 1,435 RPN), shorter turnaround time (19.1 vs. 23.3 min, P
Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0226477 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 26477&type=printable (application/pdf)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0226477
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226477
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().