[cmsmasters_row data_width=”boxed” data_padding_left=”3″ data_padding_right=”3″ data_top_style=”default” data_bot_style=”default” data_color=”default” data_bg_position=”top center” data_bg_repeat=”no-repeat” data_bg_attachment=”scroll” data_bg_size=”cover” data_bg_parallax_ratio=”0.5″ data_padding_top=”0″ data_padding_bottom=”50″][cmsmasters_column data_width=”1/1″][cmsmasters_text animation_delay=”0″]

Anesth Analg. 2017 Jan;124(1):216-232.

National and International Guidelines for Patient Blood Management in Obstetrics: A Qualitative Review.

Shaylor R¹, Weiniger CF, Austin N, Tzabazis A, Shander A, Goodnough LT, Butwick AJ.

1 From the *Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel; †Departments of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California; ‡Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care Medicine, Pain Management and Hyperbaric Medicine, Englewood Hospital and Medical Center, Englewood, New Jersey; §Departments of Anesthesiology, Medicine and Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; and ‖Department of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.

Abstract

In developed countries, rates of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) requiring transfusion have been increasing. As a result, anesthesiologists are being increasingly called upon to assist with the management of patients with severe PPH. First responders, including anesthesiologists, may adopt Patient Blood Management (PBM) recommendations of national societies or other agencies. However, it is unclear whether national and international obstetric societies’ PPH guidelines account for contemporary PBM practices. We performed a qualitative review of PBM recommendations published by the following national obstetric societies and international groups: the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, United Kingdom; The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada; an interdisciplinary group of experts from Austria, Germany, and Switzerland, an international multidisciplinary consensus group, and the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians. We also reviewed a PPH bundle, published by The National Partnership for Maternal Safety. On the basis of our review, we identified important differences in national and international societies’ recommendations for transfusion and PBM. In the light of PBM advances in the nonobstetric setting, obstetric societies should determine the applicability of these recommendations in the obstetric setting. Partnerships among medical, obstetric, and anesthetic societies may also help standardize transfusion and PBM guidelines in obstetrics.

[/cmsmasters_text][/cmsmasters_column][/cmsmasters_row][cmsmasters_row data_padding_bottom=”50″ data_padding_top=”0″ data_bg_parallax_ratio=”0.5″ data_bg_size=”cover” data_bg_attachment=”scroll” data_bg_repeat=”no-repeat” data_bg_position=”top center” data_color=”default” data_bot_style=”default” data_top_style=”default” data_padding_right=”3″ data_padding_left=”3″ data_width=”boxed”][cmsmasters_column data_width=”1/1″][cmsmasters_text animation_delay=”0″]

[pdf-embedder url=”https://awgp.pt/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/National-and-international-guidelines-for-patient-blood-management-in-obstetrics-a-qualitative-review-NIHMS.pdf” title=”National and international guidelines for patient blood management in obstetrics – a qualitative review – NIHMS”]

[/cmsmasters_text][/cmsmasters_column][/cmsmasters_row]