| Title |
Transfusion practices at end of life for hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-017-4023-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Winnie S. Wang, Joseph D. Ma, Sandahl H. Nelson, Carolyn Revta, Gary T. Buckholz, Carolyn Mulroney, Eric J. Roeland |
| Abstract |
Limited data exist regarding transfusion practices at end of life (EOL) for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients. The purpose of this study was to examine red blood cell (RBC) and platelet transfusion practices in HSCT patients who enrolled or did not enroll in hospice. This was a single-center, retrospective chart review in deceased HSCT patients. The primary objective was to determine the mean difference between the last transfusion and death in HSCT patients (n = 116) who enrolled or did not enroll in hospice. Sixteen (14%) and 100 (86%) patients were enrolled in hospice and not enrolled in hospice, respectively. Hospice patients observed a larger mean difference between death and last transfusion (45.9 ± 66.7 vs. 14.6 ± 48.1 days, p < 0.0001). A higher amount of platelet, but not RBC, transfusions occurred in patients not enrolled in hospice (p = 0.04). The last transfusion that occurred more than 96 h before death was observed in 12 (75%) and 22 (22%) in hospice and non-hospice patients, respectively. For HSCT patients not enrolled in hospice, 17 patients received a transfusion on the same day of death and 31 patients received the last transfusion 24 h before death. Blood transfusion practices differed in HSCT patients enrolled and not enrolled in hospice. For most patients not enrolled in hospice, the last transfusion occurred 24 h before death. Future efforts should explore if limited access to blood products is a barrier to hospice enrollment for HSCT patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 8 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 November 2018.
All research outputs
#12,766,410
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,341
of 4,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,998
of 441,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#46
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,976 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.