Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Blood use in elective surgery: the Austrian benchmark study

Gombotz, Hans, Rehak, Peter H., Shander, Aryeh, Hofmann, Axel·2007·Transfusion

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking transfusion activity may help to eliminate inappropriate use of blood products. The goal of this study was to measure and to compare the current transfusion practice and to identify predictors of transfusion in public hospitals to develop strategies to optimize transfusion practices. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective observational study in 18 randomly selected public hospitals from April 2004 to February 2005. Primary outcome measures were the amount of intra‐ and postoperative blood components transfused and intercenter variability of transfusion rate. Secondary outcome measures were prevalence of preoperative anemia, calculated perioperative blood loss, and lowest measured perioperative hemoglobin (Hb) level. RESULTS: Adult patients undergoing primary unilateral total hip replacement (THR, n = 1401), primary unilateral knee replacement (TKR, n = 1296), hemicolectomy (HECOC, n = 148), and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery (n = 777) were enrolled. Due to the small number, data of HECOC patients were not fully analyzed. In the remaining procedures, there was a large intercenter variability in the percentage of patients who received transfusions: THR 16 to 85 percent, TKR 12 to 87 percent, and CABG 37 to 63 percent. In the patients who received transfusions, the number of red blood cells (RBC) units transfused varied significantly. There was also a considerable intercenter variability in RBC loss. The prevalence of preoperative anemia was 19 percent and identical in both sexes. The incidence of preoperative anemia was three times higher in patients who received transfusions compared to those who did not. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a high intercenter variability in RBC transfusions and RBC loss in standard surgical procedures. Whereas the variability in blood loss remains largely unexplained, the main predictors for allogeneic RBC transfusions are preoperative and nadir Hb and surgical RBC loss.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01286.x

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 39 references

Cited by

See all 296

Metadata

Authors
Gombotz, H., Rehak, P. H., Shander, A., & Hofmann, A.
Venue
Transfusion
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-06-07
Volume
47
Issue
8
Pages
1468-1480
ISSN
  • 0041-1132 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2995
OpenAlex
W2028161433
Cited by
296
References
39
FWCI
5.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Blood use in elective surgery: the Austrian benchmark study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01286.x
The paper
Gombotz, H., Rehak, P. H., Shander, A., & Hofmann, A. (2007). Blood use in elective surgery: the Austrian benchmark study. Transfusion. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01286.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.