Scholarlink

Background <p>Blood transfusion is a vital therapeutic intervention, but the frequency and severity of transfusion reactions can compromise its safe administration. Effective hemovigilance relies on healthcare professionals’ alertness in recognizing and reporting adverse transfusion reactions (ATRs). This study assessed the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) regarding hemovigilance among healthcare professionals and identified predictors of underreporting in a tertiary care setting.</p> Methods <p>This hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted from January to April 2025 in a tertiary care teaching hospital in North Kerala, India. Fifty-two doctors and nurses involved in transfusion practices were enrolled using simple random sampling. Data were collected via a pre-validated, self-administered 36-item questionnaire covering demographics, knowledge (8 items), attitude (6 items), practice (4 items), barriers to reporting (9 items), and suggestions for improvement (9 items). Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) were used for analysis. The questionnaire demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha &gt; 0.7).</p> Results <p>Most participants demonstrated good knowledge of hemovigilance, with 82.7% familiar with the concept and 88.5% recognizing its importance for patient safety. Attitudes were positive: 86.5% viewed reporting as a professional duty, and 80.8% supported integrating hemovigilance into medical and nursing curricula. However, practice lagged significantly -only 25.0% had attended hemovigilance training, and 46.2% had ever reported a transfusion reaction. Key barriers included unclear institutional reporting protocols (73.1%), time constraints due to workload (57.7%), and fear of legal repercussions (51.9%).</p> Conclusion <p>Despite strong knowledge and positive attitudes toward hemovigilance among healthcare professionals, a significant gap in reporting adverse transfusion reactions (ATRs) persists. This underreporting is primarily due to systemic barriers like unclear protocols and inadequate training. To enhance hemovigilance compliance and improve transfusion safety, it is essential to strengthen institutional guidelines, implement regular hands-on training programs, and simplify reporting mechanisms.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A cross sectional study on hemovigilance awareness and reporting practices among healthcare professionals in a tertiary care hospital in North Kerala

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月18日

查看全文
  • P. C. Sai Keerthana,
  • Hemalatha Selvaraj

摘要

Background

Blood transfusion is a vital therapeutic intervention, but the frequency and severity of transfusion reactions can compromise its safe administration. Effective hemovigilance relies on healthcare professionals’ alertness in recognizing and reporting adverse transfusion reactions (ATRs). This study assessed the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) regarding hemovigilance among healthcare professionals and identified predictors of underreporting in a tertiary care setting.

Methods

This hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted from January to April 2025 in a tertiary care teaching hospital in North Kerala, India. Fifty-two doctors and nurses involved in transfusion practices were enrolled using simple random sampling. Data were collected via a pre-validated, self-administered 36-item questionnaire covering demographics, knowledge (8 items), attitude (6 items), practice (4 items), barriers to reporting (9 items), and suggestions for improvement (9 items). Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) were used for analysis. The questionnaire demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha > 0.7).

Results

Most participants demonstrated good knowledge of hemovigilance, with 82.7% familiar with the concept and 88.5% recognizing its importance for patient safety. Attitudes were positive: 86.5% viewed reporting as a professional duty, and 80.8% supported integrating hemovigilance into medical and nursing curricula. However, practice lagged significantly -only 25.0% had attended hemovigilance training, and 46.2% had ever reported a transfusion reaction. Key barriers included unclear institutional reporting protocols (73.1%), time constraints due to workload (57.7%), and fear of legal repercussions (51.9%).

Conclusion

Despite strong knowledge and positive attitudes toward hemovigilance among healthcare professionals, a significant gap in reporting adverse transfusion reactions (ATRs) persists. This underreporting is primarily due to systemic barriers like unclear protocols and inadequate training. To enhance hemovigilance compliance and improve transfusion safety, it is essential to strengthen institutional guidelines, implement regular hands-on training programs, and simplify reporting mechanisms.