Key factors influencing the incidence of hemolysis: A critical appraisal of current evidence

Euan James McCaughey, Elia Vecellio, Rebecca Lake, Ling Li, Leslie Burnett, Douglas Chesher, Stephen Braye, Mark Mackay, Stephanie Gay, Tony Badrick, Johanna Westbrook, Andrew Georgiou

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Hemolysis is a leading cause of pre-analytical laboratory errors. The identification of contributing factors is an important step towards the development of effective practices to reduce and prevent hemolysis. We performed a review of PUBMED, Embase, Medline and CINAHL to identify articles published between January 2000 and August 2016 that identified factors influencing in vitro hemolysis rates. The 40 studies included in this review provide excellent evidence that hemolysis rates are higher in Emergency Departments (EDs), for non-antecubital draws, for specimens drawn using an intravenous catheter compared to venipuncture and for samples transported by pneumatic tube compared to by hand. There is also good evidence that hemolysis rates are higher when specimens are not collected by professional phlebotomists, larger volume specimen tubes are used, specimen tubes are filled less than halfway and tourniquet time is greater than one minute. The results of this review suggest that hospitals and clinical laboratories should consider deploying phlebotomists in EDs, drawing all blood through a venipuncture, using the antecubital region as the optimum blood collection site and transporting specimens by laboratory assistant/other personnel, or if this in not practical, ensuring that pneumatic transport systems are validated, maintained and monitored. Studies also recommend making hemolysis a hospital-wide issue and ensuring high-quality staff training and adherence to standard operating procedures to reduce hemolysis rates. Awareness of the factors that influence hemolysis rates, and adoption of strategies to mitigate these risk factors, is an important step towards creating quality practices to reduce hemolysis rates and improve the quality of patient care.

LanguageEnglish
Pages59-72
Number of pages14
JournalCritical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences
Volume54
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Jan 2017

Fingerprint

Hemolysis
Pneumatic tubes
Incidence
Blood
Clinical laboratories
Catheters
Pneumatics
Phlebotomy
Personnel
Hospital Emergency Service
Laboratory Personnel
Hospital Laboratories
Tourniquets
Quality of Health Care
Patient Care
Hand

Keywords

  • Blood
  • hemolysis
  • laboratory
  • pathology
  • preanalytical error
  • specimen

Cite this

McCaughey, Euan James ; Vecellio, Elia ; Lake, Rebecca ; Li, Ling ; Burnett, Leslie ; Chesher, Douglas ; Braye, Stephen ; Mackay, Mark ; Gay, Stephanie ; Badrick, Tony ; Westbrook, Johanna ; Georgiou, Andrew. / Key factors influencing the incidence of hemolysis : A critical appraisal of current evidence. In: Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences. 2017 ; Vol. 54, No. 1. pp. 59-72.
@article{1e00ac52523a4d4e93764ee3b3450421,
title = "Key factors influencing the incidence of hemolysis: A critical appraisal of current evidence",
abstract = "Hemolysis is a leading cause of pre-analytical laboratory errors. The identification of contributing factors is an important step towards the development of effective practices to reduce and prevent hemolysis. We performed a review of PUBMED, Embase, Medline and CINAHL to identify articles published between January 2000 and August 2016 that identified factors influencing in vitro hemolysis rates. The 40 studies included in this review provide excellent evidence that hemolysis rates are higher in Emergency Departments (EDs), for non-antecubital draws, for specimens drawn using an intravenous catheter compared to venipuncture and for samples transported by pneumatic tube compared to by hand. There is also good evidence that hemolysis rates are higher when specimens are not collected by professional phlebotomists, larger volume specimen tubes are used, specimen tubes are filled less than halfway and tourniquet time is greater than one minute. The results of this review suggest that hospitals and clinical laboratories should consider deploying phlebotomists in EDs, drawing all blood through a venipuncture, using the antecubital region as the optimum blood collection site and transporting specimens by laboratory assistant/other personnel, or if this in not practical, ensuring that pneumatic transport systems are validated, maintained and monitored. Studies also recommend making hemolysis a hospital-wide issue and ensuring high-quality staff training and adherence to standard operating procedures to reduce hemolysis rates. Awareness of the factors that influence hemolysis rates, and adoption of strategies to mitigate these risk factors, is an important step towards creating quality practices to reduce hemolysis rates and improve the quality of patient care.",
keywords = "Blood, hemolysis, laboratory, pathology, preanalytical error, specimen",
author = "McCaughey, {Euan James} and Elia Vecellio and Rebecca Lake and Ling Li and Leslie Burnett and Douglas Chesher and Stephen Braye and Mark Mackay and Stephanie Gay and Tony Badrick and Johanna Westbrook and Andrew Georgiou",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/10408363.2016.1250247",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "59--72",
journal = "Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences",
issn = "1040-8363",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "1",

}

Key factors influencing the incidence of hemolysis : A critical appraisal of current evidence. / McCaughey, Euan James; Vecellio, Elia; Lake, Rebecca; Li, Ling; Burnett, Leslie; Chesher, Douglas; Braye, Stephen; Mackay, Mark; Gay, Stephanie; Badrick, Tony; Westbrook, Johanna; Georgiou, Andrew.

In: Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences, Vol. 54, No. 1, 02.01.2017, p. 59-72.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Key factors influencing the incidence of hemolysis

T2 - Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences

AU - McCaughey, Euan James

AU - Vecellio, Elia

AU - Lake, Rebecca

AU - Li, Ling

AU - Burnett, Leslie

AU - Chesher, Douglas

AU - Braye, Stephen

AU - Mackay, Mark

AU - Gay, Stephanie

AU - Badrick, Tony

AU - Westbrook, Johanna

AU - Georgiou, Andrew

PY - 2017/1/2

Y1 - 2017/1/2

N2 - Hemolysis is a leading cause of pre-analytical laboratory errors. The identification of contributing factors is an important step towards the development of effective practices to reduce and prevent hemolysis. We performed a review of PUBMED, Embase, Medline and CINAHL to identify articles published between January 2000 and August 2016 that identified factors influencing in vitro hemolysis rates. The 40 studies included in this review provide excellent evidence that hemolysis rates are higher in Emergency Departments (EDs), for non-antecubital draws, for specimens drawn using an intravenous catheter compared to venipuncture and for samples transported by pneumatic tube compared to by hand. There is also good evidence that hemolysis rates are higher when specimens are not collected by professional phlebotomists, larger volume specimen tubes are used, specimen tubes are filled less than halfway and tourniquet time is greater than one minute. The results of this review suggest that hospitals and clinical laboratories should consider deploying phlebotomists in EDs, drawing all blood through a venipuncture, using the antecubital region as the optimum blood collection site and transporting specimens by laboratory assistant/other personnel, or if this in not practical, ensuring that pneumatic transport systems are validated, maintained and monitored. Studies also recommend making hemolysis a hospital-wide issue and ensuring high-quality staff training and adherence to standard operating procedures to reduce hemolysis rates. Awareness of the factors that influence hemolysis rates, and adoption of strategies to mitigate these risk factors, is an important step towards creating quality practices to reduce hemolysis rates and improve the quality of patient care.

AB - Hemolysis is a leading cause of pre-analytical laboratory errors. The identification of contributing factors is an important step towards the development of effective practices to reduce and prevent hemolysis. We performed a review of PUBMED, Embase, Medline and CINAHL to identify articles published between January 2000 and August 2016 that identified factors influencing in vitro hemolysis rates. The 40 studies included in this review provide excellent evidence that hemolysis rates are higher in Emergency Departments (EDs), for non-antecubital draws, for specimens drawn using an intravenous catheter compared to venipuncture and for samples transported by pneumatic tube compared to by hand. There is also good evidence that hemolysis rates are higher when specimens are not collected by professional phlebotomists, larger volume specimen tubes are used, specimen tubes are filled less than halfway and tourniquet time is greater than one minute. The results of this review suggest that hospitals and clinical laboratories should consider deploying phlebotomists in EDs, drawing all blood through a venipuncture, using the antecubital region as the optimum blood collection site and transporting specimens by laboratory assistant/other personnel, or if this in not practical, ensuring that pneumatic transport systems are validated, maintained and monitored. Studies also recommend making hemolysis a hospital-wide issue and ensuring high-quality staff training and adherence to standard operating procedures to reduce hemolysis rates. Awareness of the factors that influence hemolysis rates, and adoption of strategies to mitigate these risk factors, is an important step towards creating quality practices to reduce hemolysis rates and improve the quality of patient care.

KW - Blood

KW - hemolysis

KW - laboratory

KW - pathology

KW - preanalytical error

KW - specimen

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85010953650&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10408363.2016.1250247

DO - 10.1080/10408363.2016.1250247

M3 - Review article

VL - 54

SP - 59

EP - 72

JO - Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences

JF - Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences

SN - 1040-8363

IS - 1

ER -