Assessment of accuracy of clinical blood loss estimation compared to actual blood loss during major surgeries

Objectives: This study aims to assess the accuracy of clinical blood loss estimation compared to actual blood loss (ABL) during major surgeries. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients undergoing major surgery for various indications were included in the study. They were assigned into two groups of 25 each as they came, Group C (clinical method group) and Group F (formula method). In Group C, blood loss estimation was carried out using the clinical method of blood loss estimation (gravimetric and visual methods) whereas, in Group F, the blood loss was obtained using the modified gross formula method. The data obtained from the study were analyzed electronically using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20.0 and these data were presented using relevant tables and figures. A comparison of blood loss between the two groups was determined using an unpaired Student t -test. Results: The mean hematocrit (HCT) before the surgery was 34.00 ± 0.52, whereas the mean HCT after the surgery was 29.00 ± 0.61. The mean drop in HCT was 5.00 ± 0.36. The mean ABL was 855.80 ± 83.17 mL. The mean blood loss estimated by the gravimetric method was 805.40 ± 392.72 mL, whereas the mean error of estimation by the gravimetric method was 50.40 ± 163.23 mL which was statistically not significant ( P = 0.30). The mean blood loss by visual method was 650 mL ± 132.34. The mean difference between ABL and visual method of estimation was 205.60 mL, and this was statistically significant ( P = 0.02). Conclusion: The gravimetric method and visual method of blood loss were the two clinical methods of blood loss estimation used in this study. The two clinical methods when compared to ABL, they underestimated the blood loss by 19.24% and 39.48%, respectively.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Indian Journal of Medical Sciences
Published
2024-09-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25259/ijms_57_2024
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.42
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of accuracy of clinical blood loss estimation compared to actual blood loss during major surgeries

Abdullahi Khalid, Bashir Garba Aljannare
1 citations
Indian Journal of Medical Sciences
Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
0.42
article

Assessment of accuracy of clinical blood loss estimation compared to actual blood loss during major surgeries

Abdullahi Khalid, Bashir Garba Aljannare
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to assess the accuracy of clinical blood loss estimation compared to actual blood loss (ABL) during major surgeries. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients undergoing major surgery for various indications were included in the study. They were assigned into two groups of 25 each as they came, Group C (clinical method group) and Group F (formula method). In Group C, blood loss estimation was carried out using the clinical method of blood loss estimation (gravimetric and visual methods) whereas, in Group F, the blood loss was obtained using the modified gross formula method. The data obtained from the study were analyzed electronically using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20.0 and these data were presented using relevant tables and figures. A comparison of blood loss between the two groups was determined using an unpaired Student t -test. Results: The mean hematocrit (HCT) before the surgery was 34.00 ± 0.52, whereas the mean HCT after the surgery was 29.00 ± 0.61. The mean drop in HCT was 5.00 ± 0.36. The mean ABL was 855.80 ± 83.17 mL. The mean blood loss estimated by the gravimetric method was 805.40 ± 392.72 mL, whereas the mean error of estimation by the gravimetric method was 50.40 ± 163.23 mL which was statistically not significant ( P = 0.30). The mean blood loss by visual method was 650 mL ± 132.34. The mean difference between ABL and visual method of estimation was 205.60 mL, and this was statistically significant ( P = 0.02). Conclusion: The gravimetric method and visual method of blood loss were the two clinical methods of blood loss estimation used in this study. The two clinical methods when compared to ABL, they underestimated the blood loss by 19.24% and 39.48%, respectively.

Indian Journal of Medical SciencesVol. 77
Usmanu Danfodiyo University Teaching Hospital, Sokoto (NG)
Openalex Percentile: Top 36%
Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
0.42
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Assessment of accuracy of clinical blood loss estimation compared to actual blood loss during major surgeries — Abdullahi Khalid, Bashir Garba Aljannare · Indian Journal of Medical Sciences (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS