Phlebotomy technique and its impact on haemolysis in the emergency department

Background Haemolysis is a pre-analytical problem that compromises laboratory test accuracy and delays care by necessitating repeat testing. Haemolysis rates in emergency department samples are higher than those in inpatient or outpatient settings. This study evaluated the association between phlebotomy techniques and haemolysis rates in the emergency department. Methods Blood samples collected in the emergency department with documented phlebotomy technique between November 2023 and September 2024 were audited. Five phlebotomy methods were compared: [1] needle/butterfly to vacutainer (closed system), [2] syringe-needle draw, [3] syringe draw from an intravenous cannula, [4] vacutainer collection from cannula using an adapter, and [5] use of a discard tube for either needle or cannula draws. Haemolysis was defined by an Abbott Alinity H-index ≥1.25 (≈1.25 g/L free haemoglobin), above which potassium results are suppressed by the laboratory. Results Among 586 samples, 42 (7.2%) were haemolysed. Haemolysis rates were 16.7% (2/12) for syringe draw from intravenous cannula, 14.8% (31/209) for vacutainer collection from intravenous cannula using an adapter, 6.3% (1/16) for syringe-needle draw, 2.4% (2/83) for methods using a discard-tube in either needle or cannula collection, and 2.3% (6/266) for needle/butterfly to vacutainer closed phlebotomy method. Haemolysis differed significantly by method ( p < 0.0001): draws from cannula using adapter had higher rates than closed phlebotomy ( p < 0.0001) and discard-tube draws ( p = 0.0017). Conclusion Closed phlebotomy methods, particularly needle or butterfly collection into vacutainer tubes, were associated with the lowest haemolysis rates. Discard-tube samples also had low haemolysis rates, although their effect remains uncertain.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Annals of Clinical Biochemistry International Journal of Laboratory Medicine
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00045632261497586
Primary Topic
Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Phlebotomy technique and its impact on haemolysis in the emergency department

Jonathan Samuel Fenn, Rousseau Mariano Gama, Tejas Kalaria, Ahmed Elgharably et al.
Annals of Clinical Biochemistry International Journal of Laboratory Medicine
Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
article

Phlebotomy technique and its impact on haemolysis in the emergency department

Jonathan Samuel Fenn, Rousseau Mariano Gama, Tejas Kalaria, Ahmed Elgharably, Lauren Starbrook, Shivani Mahapatra, Thushi Ashmore
article en

Abstract

Background Haemolysis is a pre-analytical problem that compromises laboratory test accuracy and delays care by necessitating repeat testing. Haemolysis rates in emergency department samples are higher than those in inpatient or outpatient settings. This study evaluated the association between phlebotomy techniques and haemolysis rates in the emergency department. Methods Blood samples collected in the emergency department with documented phlebotomy technique between November 2023 and September 2024 were audited. Five phlebotomy methods were compared: [1] needle/butterfly to vacutainer (closed system), [2] syringe-needle draw, [3] syringe draw from an intravenous cannula, [4] vacutainer collection from cannula using an adapter, and [5] use of a discard tube for either needle or cannula draws. Haemolysis was defined by an Abbott Alinity H-index ≥1.25 (≈1.25 g/L free haemoglobin), above which potassium results are suppressed by the laboratory. Results Among 586 samples, 42 (7.2%) were haemolysed. Haemolysis rates were 16.7% (2/12) for syringe draw from intravenous cannula, 14.8% (31/209) for vacutainer collection from intravenous cannula using an adapter, 6.3% (1/16) for syringe-needle draw, 2.4% (2/83) for methods using a discard-tube in either needle or cannula collection, and 2.3% (6/266) for needle/butterfly to vacutainer closed phlebotomy method. Haemolysis differed significantly by method ( p < 0.0001): draws from cannula using adapter had higher rates than closed phlebotomy ( p < 0.0001) and discard-tube draws ( p = 0.0017). Conclusion Closed phlebotomy methods, particularly needle or butterfly collection into vacutainer tubes, were associated with the lowest haemolysis rates. Discard-tube samples also had low haemolysis rates, although their effect remains uncertain.

Annals of Clinical Biochemistry International Journal of Laboratory Medicine
University of Wolverhampton (GB), The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
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.