机构地区:[1]山东省血液中心,山东济南250014 [2]青岛市中心血站 [3]潍坊市中心血站 [4]烟台市中心血站 [5]淄博市中心血站 [6]东营市中心血站 [7]日照市中心血站 [8]威海市中心血站 [9]滨州市中心血站 [10]菏泽市中心血站 [11]济南市血液供保中心 [12]泰安市中心血站 [13]济宁市中心血站 [14]临沂市中心血站 [15]聊城市中心血站 [16]枣庄市中心血站 [17]德州市中心血站
出 处:《中国输血杂志》2024年第3期267-274,共8页Chinese Journal of Blood Transfusion
基 金:山东省级医疗质量管理工作项目(2018-22)。
摘 要:目的建立有效的血站血液质量控制监测指标体系,对采供血质量控制指标数据进行分析,客观评价血液质量控制过程的差距,促进血站血液质量控制的持续提升和标准化管理。方法建立覆盖采供血全过程的献血服务、成分制备、血液检测、血液供应和质量控制的质量监测指标体系,向山东省17家血站发放《采供血过程质量监测指标统计表》,明确指标定义和计算公式,收集各血站2022年1—12月质量监测指标数据,利用SPSS25.0软件对其中的质量控制(20个)的质量监测指标数据进行统计学分析,P<0.05差异具有统计学意义。结果17家血站关键设备监测合格率、环境卫生监测合格率、关键物料监测合格率、血液质量检查项目合格率平均值分别为99.47%、99.51%、99.95%和98.99%,不同规模血站间环境卫生监测合格率差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),血液质量检查项目总数与血液制备总量皮尔逊相关系数r=0.645(P<0.05)。检验报废率、非检验报废率平均值为1.14%、3.36%,在不同规模血站间的报废率差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。乳糜血报废率平均为3.07%,乳糜血报废率与非检验报废率成正相关(r=0.9813,P<0.05),实施乳糜血控制措施的血站和未实施控制措施的血站之间的乳糜血报废率差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。血液色泽异常报废率、非标量血液报废率、血袋破损报废率、溶血报废率、血液蛋白析出报废率、血液凝块报废率平均值为0.20%、0.14%、0.06%、0.06%、0.02%、0.02%,6项指标在大、中、小规模血站间进行比较,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05);血液过期报废率、其他因素报废率、保密性弃血报废率、不合格标本血报废率平均值为0.02%、0.05%、0.003%、0.004%。气泡血报废率为0.015%,异物血报废率和标签不合格血报废率均为0。结论山东省血站质量控制监测指标体系能够监测过程管理中的薄弱环节,具有较�Objective To establish an effective quality monitoring indicator system for blood quality control in blood banks,in order to analyze the quality control indicators for blood collection and supply,and evaluate blood quality control process,thus promoting continuous improvement and standardizing management of blood quality control in blood banks.Methods A quality monitoring indicator system covering the whole process of blood collection and supply,including blood donation services,component preparation,blood testing,blood supply and quality control was established.The Questionnaire of Quality Monitoring Indicators for Blood Collection and Supply Process was distributed to 17 blood banks in Shandong,which clarified the definition and calculation formula of indicators.The quality monitoring indicator data from January to December 2022 in each blood bank were collected,and 20 quality control indicators data were analyzed by SPSS25.0 software.Results The average pass rate of key equipment monitoring,environment monitoring,key material monitoring,and blood testing item monitoring of 17 blood banks were 99.47%,99.51%,99.95%and 98.99%,respectively.Significant difference was noticed in the pass rate of environment monitoring among blood banks of varied scales(P<0.05),and the Pearson correlation coefficient(r)between the total number of blood quality testing items and the total amount of blood component preparation was 0.645(P<0.05).The average discarding rates of blood testing or non-blood testing were 1.14%and 3.36%respectively,showing significant difference among blood banks of varied scales(P<0.05).The average discarding rate of lipemic blood was 3.07%,which had a positive correlation with the discarding rate of non testing(r=0.9813,P<0.05).There was a statistically significant difference in the discarding rate of lipemic blood between blood banks with lipemic blood control measures and those without(P<0.05).The average discarding rate of abnormal color,non-standard volume,blood bag damage,hemolysis,blood protein precip
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...