It has been observed that there is a disorganized practice to place the orders for blood requirement in elective surgeries moreover incidence show a wasteful use of blood in the execution of elective surgeries (Gianoutsos, 2008). It is therefore essential that there should be an approach of “group and screen” procedure compared to going for the full cross-match once transfusion is compulsory and therefore orders must be placed accordingly (Gianoutsos, 2008).
In order to avoid the occurrence of hepatitis and HTLV-III infections, an approach of predeposit autotransfusion was realized specifically in elective surgery. This facilitates the conservation of homologous blood and creates an awareness and understanding for the proceeds of autotransfusion (Rebulla, 1987). This kind of approach finds its way through the advancement in the use of preservatives. The method has the advantage over the homologous transfusion where an individual receives the donor’s blood and hence risk life with hepatitis (risk is 46%), malaria, syphilis, allergic reaction (risk is 20 -25%) and mismatches due to any technical errors (risk is 61%). It is therefore essential for planned surgeries to have an autologist transfusion of blood to eliminate risks as it speed up the healing process (Holm, 1981).
In order to find out the extent to which autologous blood that has been donated in advance and is used by the patient during the process of elective surgery, a study was carried out where 4996 patients undergoing elective surgery, of these, 1287 patients placed order for cross-matched blood even though 590 patients were found to be suitable for predepositing blood suggesting unawareness about predepositing blood. Merely 5% (32 patients) of the patients predeposited the blood, still 4 amongst these got homologous blood. The study concludes that by predonation of blood 68% homologous blood transfusion could have been avoided (Toy, 1987). This is autologous