Turnaround time for the provision of packed red cells (PRC) and factors affecting their achievements in the Blood Transfusion Unit of Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta

https://doi.org/10.19106/JMedSci005503202304

Surawijaya Bakhtiar Kaslam(1*), Usi Sukorini(2), Teguh Triyono(3)

(1) Departement of Clinical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada/ Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta
(2) Departement of Clinical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada/ Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta
(3) Departement of Clinical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada/ Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Turnaround time (TAT) is defined as the time it takes since request/sample is received at the blood bank until blood is cross-matched/reserved and available for transfusion. Turnround time prolongation affects patient care and satisfaction. This study aimed to evaluate TAT for the provision of packed red cells (PRC) at the Blood Transfusion Unit of Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta, analyze factors affected in TAT prolongation, and provide solution the prolongation.  It was an analytical descriptive study with a qualitative design, by calculating the time since receipt of the PRC request at the Blood Transfusion Unit or since blood collection from donors until data input of the crossmatch results in Dr. Sardjito General Hospital management information system (SIMETRIS) completed. Moreover, the  delay in the provision of PRC at the Blood Transfusion Unit was also analyzed. There were 3 (1.5%) of 200 ER samples that met TAT for the provision of the PRC, which was 30 min after receipt of the request at the Blood Transfusion Unit in cito conditions. There were 20 (10%) of 200 samples from the wards that met TAT for the provision of the PRC, which was 2 h after receipt of the request at the Blood Transfusion Unit if the blood stock was available. There were 55 (27.5%) of 200 samples from the wards that met TAT for the provision of the PRC, which was 4 h after the blood was collected from the donor. TAT for the provision of the PRC at the Blood Transfusion for the available blood stock group was 179.08 (67.2 – 396.27) min, replacement blood donor group was 485.38 (126.43 – 910.68) min, and cito group was 121.29 (27.68 – 421.38) min. In conclusion, there is TAT prolongation of PRC provision at the Blood Transfusion Unit of Dr. Sardjito General Hospital.


Keywords


turn around time; prolongation; provision; packed red cells; blood transfusion unit

Full Text:

PDF


References

Lee AJ, Kim SG. Analysis of turnaround time for intraoperative red blood cell issues: a single-center study. Lab Med 2017; 48(3):277-81.
https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmx016
2.Sharma M, Arora S, Malhotra A. Analysis of turnaround time for issuance of blood products in emergency: a prospective study in a tertiary care centre in Jammu. JMSCR 2018; 6(11):231-6.
https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v6i11.42
3.Mandal PK, Pal S, Ghosh N, Khan K, Chakrabarti I, Bhattacharyya K. Time and motion study of blood delivery system in a regional blood transfusion centre in West Bengal: a pilot study. Nat J Lab Med 2018; 7(4):11-6.
https://doi.org/10.7860/NJLM/2018/28055:2312
4.Nyamongo J, Oduor M, Obure S, Wilson S, Mwanyumba J, Aly O, et al. General guidelines for appropriate transfusion practice. Guidelines for the appropriate use of blood and blood products. 2nd ed. Nairobi: The Kenya National Blood Transfusion Service. 2004.
5.Hammad YA, Ansari WE, Shallik NA, Sadek MH, Feki AM, Bedhiaf K, et al. Quality improvement can decrease blood delivery turnaround time: evidence from a single tertiary-care academic medical center. MEJ Anesth 2018; 25(3):279-87.
6.Ramanathan T, Shaiji PS, Usha KC. Turnaround time for issuing blood products in emergency-a prospective real time study in a regional blood transfusion centre. Int J Contemp Med Res 2017; 4(3):688-91.
7.Khan K. Root cause analysis (rca) of prolonged laboratory turnaround time in a tertiary care set up. J Clin Diagn Res 2014; 8(4):5-8.
https://doi.org/ 10.7860/JCDR/2014/7269.4255
8.Jones RW, Despotou G. Root Cause Analysis and Health Informatics. Stud Health Technol Inform 2016; 226:131-4.
9.Gertler SA, Coralic Z, López A, Stein JC, Sarkar U. Root cause analysis of ambulatory adverse drug events that present to the emergency department. J Patient Saf 2016; 12(3):119-24.
https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000072
10.Filip A. Complaint management: a customer satisfaction learning process. Proc Soc Behav Sci 2013; 93(2):271-5.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.09.188
11.Utarini A. Penelitian kualitatif dalam pelayanan kesehatan. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press. 2020.
12.Picarillo AP. Introduction to quality improvement tools for the clinician. J Perinatol 2018; 38(7):929-35.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-018-0100-4
13.Dahlan MS. Besar sampel dalam penelitian kedokteran dan kesehatan. 4th ed. Jakarta: Epidemiologi Indonesia, 2016.
14.Tjiptono F and Chandra G. Service, quality and satisfaction. Yogyakarta: Andi Offset, 2005.
15.Badan PPSDM Kesehatan. Perencanaan kebutuhan sdm kesehatan berdasarkan metode analisis beban kerja kesehatan (ABK Kes). Jakarta: BPPSDM Kesehatan RI, 2015. pp. 1-43.
16.Priyono. Manajemen sumber daya manusia. Surabaya: Zifatama Publisher, 2010.
17.Stock JR and Lambert DM. Strategic logistics management. 4th ed. New York: Mc-Graw Hill Publisher, 2001.
18.Barata AA. Dasar-dasar pelayanan prima. Jakarta: PT Elex Media Komputindo, 2003.
19.Departemen Kesehatan RI. Pedoman pengelolaan bank darah rumah sakit. Jakarta: Departemen Kesehatan RI. 2008.
20.Rusdiana A. Asas-asas manajemen berwawasan global. Bandung: Pustaka Setia Publisher 2014.
21.Kalkavan S, Katrinli A. The effects of managerial coaching behaviors on the employees’ perception of job satisfaction, organisational commitment, and job performance: case study on insurance industry in Turkey. Proc Soc Behav Sci, 2014; 150:1137-47.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.129
22.Masawat J, Roongtawanreongsri S, Sawangchote P. Problem identification and prioritization methods: significant steps of forest policy formulation based on public participation. In: The Asian Conference on the Social Sciences 2016 Official Conference Proceedings, Jun 9-12, Kobe, Japan. Nagoya: The International Academic Forum; 2016.
http://papers.iafor.org/wp-content/uploads/papers/acss2016/ACSS2016_31611.pdf
23.Nasution MN. Manajemen jasa terpadu. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia. 2004.



DOI: https://doi.org/10.19106/JMedSci005503202304

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 930 | views : 828




Copyright (c) 2023 Surawijaya Bakhtiar Kaslam, Usi Sukorini, Teguh Triyono

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.