Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Objectives Demand for rapid coagulation testing for massive transfusion events led to development of an emergency hemorrhage panel (EHP; hemoglobin, platelet count, prothrombin time/international normalized ratio, and fibrinogen), with laboratory turnaround time (TAT) of less than 20 minutes. Ten years on, we asked if current laboratory practices were meeting that TAT goal and differences were evident in TAT between the 2 major institutions in our system. Methods We identified EHPs ordered at our 2 largest hospitals, February 2, 2021, to July 17, 2022, comparing order to specimen draw time, specimen draw to specimen received time, laboratory analytic time, and total TAT results from emergency department and operating room. Site 1 houses a level I trauma center; site 2 includes tertiary care, transplant, and obstetrics services. Results In total, 1137 EHPs were recorded in our study period. Laboratory TAT was significantly faster at site 1 (~14 vs ~27 minutes, P .01). Average laboratory TAT was under 20 minutes at site 1 but only for 50% of specimens at site 2. Outlier specimens were collection delays at site 1 and specimen processing delays at site 2. Conclusions The EHP can be performed as rapidly as described. However, compromises in laboratory location, available personnel, and processing differences can degrade performance.
Hogan et al. (Mon,) studied this question.