Evidence Hub

Effectiveness of practices to reduce blood sample hemolysis in EDs: a laboratory medicine best practices systematic review and meta-analysis

N. J. Heyer, James H Derzon, L. Winges, C. Shaw, D. Mass, Susan R. Snyder, Paul L. Epner, J. Nichols et al.

Clinical Biochemistry, 2012

109 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To complete a systematic review of emergency department (ED) practices for reducing hemolysis in blood samples sent to the clinical laboratory for testing.

RESULTS: A total of 16 studies met the review inclusion criteria (12 published and 4 unpublished). All 11 studies comparing new straight needle venipuncture with IV starts found a reduction in hemolysis rates, [average risk ratio of 0.16 (95% CI=0.11-0.24)]. Four studies on the effect of venipuncture location showed reduced hemolysis rates for the antecubital site [average risk ratio of 0.45 (95% CI=0.35-0.57].

CONCLUSIONS: Use of new straight needle venipuncture instead of IV starts is effective at reducing hemolysis rates in EDs, and is recommended as an evidence-based best practice. The overall strength of evidence rating is high and the effect size is substantial. Unpublished studies made an important contribution to the body of evidence. When IV starts must be used, observed rates of hemolysis may be substantially reduced by placing the IV at the antecubital site.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free