OPTIMIZING GROUP AND SAVE TESTING IN MINIMAL ACCESS GYNECOLOGICAL SURGERY

Dr Neha Uddin , Dr Omar Lotfi, Mrs Madhu Kolli

AIM: 

•  Assess the cost-effectiveness and clinical impact of requiring two blood samples for Group and Save before gynaecological procedures.

 • Evaluate whether a risk-based selective approach can enhance preoperative efficiency.

METHODS: 

Design: Retrospective analysis (Oct 2023–Oct 2024).

•  Setting: Aneurin Bevan University Health Board.

•  Procedures: Selected laparoscopic gynaecological surgeries (excluding complex cases).  

•  Focus Areas:  

Group and Save history, transfusion needs, and single-sample eligibility

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

•  Records reviews: 75 cases.

•  Dual Testing Usage: 98.6% had two Group and Save tests, despite 81% having a historic sample.

•  Unnecessary Costs & Inefficiency: Routine dual testing led to resource overuse.

•  Pregnancy Factor: 44% had prior pregnancies, requiring two samples.

•  Transfusion Risk: Only 1.3% required transfusion, confirming low-risk procedures.

•  Operational Considerations:  

•  No Delays or Cancellations: No cases were affected by invalid Group and Save samples, supporting potential streamlining of testing requirements.

CONCLUSION: 

•  A selective Group and Save approach could eliminate the need for two samples in over half of cases, improving efficiency and reducing costs.  

•  Targeted testing would optimize lab workload, minimize unnecessary blood draws, and support sustainability.

•  Future policies should adopt a risk-based strategy to ensure resource efficiency while maintaining high-quality patient care.