Background: Transfusion reactions have been under-reported, and the laboratory tests to evaluate the causes of the reactions are unfamiliar to physicians other than transfusion specialists. The paper-based transfusion reaction reporting system previously used in our hospital was one-way, with physicians submitting it to the Department of Transfusion Management. To address this, we developed an electronic reporting system that improves communication with physicians to identify the cause of transfusion reactions and recommend appropriate blood components. Methods: To assess the status of transfusion reaction reporting, transfusion reaction reports and transfusion nursing records of 5 years from 2019 to 2023 were analyzed. The transfusion reaction reporting system comprises two parts: the physician's report and the response from the Department of Transfusion Management. If physicians order blood products for patients with a history of prior transfusion reactions, a pop-up alert appears, warning them to check the details of the previous report. Results: From 2019 to 2023, 2.5% cases of transfusion-related symptoms occurred annually and only 2.6% of transfusion reactions were reported. In 21 out of the 31 cases, the cause was difficult to determine due to inadequate laboratory tests.The attending physicians of 12 cases were given a recommendation to use blood products or to conduct further laboratory tests by the Department of Transfusion Management to reduce recurrence, but the advice was followed only in 4 cases. Conclusion The electronic transfusion reaction reporting system could help physicians conduct appropriate investigations for transfusion reactions and inform physicians regarding the laboratory tests required to be undertaken. It is expected to enhance blood transfusion safety and management by improving communication with physicians.

Background: Transfusion reactions have been under-reported, and the laboratory tests to evaluate the causes of the reactions are unfamiliar to physicians other than transfusion specialists. The paper-based transfusion reaction reporting system previously used in our hospital was one-way, with physicians submitting it to the Department of Transfusion Management. To address this, we developed an electronic reporting system that improves communication with physicians to identify the cause of transfusion reactions and recommend appropriate blood components. Methods: To assess the status of transfusion reaction reporting, transfusion reaction reports and transfusion nursing records of 5 years from 2019 to 2023 were analyzed. The transfusion reaction reporting system comprises two parts: the physician's report and the response from the Department of Transfusion Management. If physicians order blood products for patients with a history of prior transfusion reactions, a pop-up alert appears, warning them to check the details of the previous report. Results: From 2019 to 2023, 2.5% cases of transfusion-related symptoms occurred annually and only 2.6% of transfusion reactions were reported. In 21 out of the 31 cases, the cause was difficult to determine due to inadequate laboratory tests.The attending physicians of 12 cases were given a recommendation to use blood products or to conduct further laboratory tests by the Department of Transfusion Management to reduce recurrence, but the advice was followed only in 4 cases. Conclusion The electronic transfusion reaction reporting system could help physicians conduct appropriate investigations for transfusion reactions and inform physicians regarding the laboratory tests required to be undertaken. It is expected to enhance blood transfusion safety and management by improving communication with physicians.

Background: Transfusion reactions have been under-reported, and the laboratory tests to evaluate the causes of the reactions are unfamiliar to physicians other than transfusion specialists. The paper-based transfusion reaction reporting system previously used in our hospital was one-way, with physicians submitting it to the Department of Transfusion Management. To address this, we developed an electronic reporting system that improves communication with physicians to identify the cause of transfusion reactions and recommend appropriate blood components. Methods: To assess the status of transfusion reaction reporting, transfusion reaction reports and transfusion nursing records of 5 years from 2019 to 2023 were analyzed. The transfusion reaction reporting system comprises two parts: the physician's report and the response from the Department of Transfusion Management. If physicians order blood products for patients with a history of prior transfusion reactions, a pop-up alert appears, warning them to check the details of the previous report. Results: From 2019 to 2023, 2.5% cases of transfusion-related symptoms occurred annually and only 2.6% of transfusion reactions were reported. In 21 out of the 31 cases, the cause was difficult to determine due to inadequate laboratory tests.The attending physicians of 12 cases were given a recommendation to use blood products or to conduct further laboratory tests by the Department of Transfusion Management to reduce recurrence, but the advice was followed only in 4 cases. Conclusion The electronic transfusion reaction reporting system could help physicians conduct appropriate investigations for transfusion reactions and inform physicians regarding the laboratory tests required to be undertaken. It is expected to enhance blood transfusion safety and management by improving communication with physicians.

Background: Transfusion reactions have been under-reported, and the laboratory tests to evaluate the causes of the reactions are unfamiliar to physicians other than transfusion specialists. The paper-based transfusion reaction reporting system previously used in our hospital was one-way, with physicians submitting it to the Department of Transfusion Management. To address this, we developed an electronic reporting system that improves communication with physicians to identify the cause of transfusion reactions and recommend appropriate blood components. Methods: To assess the status of transfusion reaction reporting, transfusion reaction reports and transfusion nursing records of 5 years from 2019 to 2023 were analyzed. The transfusion reaction reporting system comprises two parts: the physician's report and the response from the Department of Transfusion Management. If physicians order blood products for patients with a history of prior transfusion reactions, a pop-up alert appears, warning them to check the details of the previous report. Results: From 2019 to 2023, 2.5% cases of transfusion-related symptoms occurred annually and only 2.6% of transfusion reactions were reported. In 21 out of the 31 cases, the cause was difficult to determine due to inadequate laboratory tests.The attending physicians of 12 cases were given a recommendation to use blood products or to conduct further laboratory tests by the Department of Transfusion Management to reduce recurrence, but the advice was followed only in 4 cases. Conclusion The electronic transfusion reaction reporting system could help physicians conduct appropriate investigations for transfusion reactions and inform physicians regarding the laboratory tests required to be undertaken. It is expected to enhance blood transfusion safety and management by improving communication with physicians.