Driven to improve patient outcomes and reduce hospital costs

Patient Blood Management (PBM) has the potential to improve global health by managing and preserving a patient’s own blood. When fully implemented, PBM has been shown to provide benefits for both patients and healthcare systems.¹

As a result, the World Health Organization (WHO) has called for its urgent implementation as a standard of care.¹ PBM is also supported by the European Commission² and is reflected in national and international guidelines and recommendations.^3–8

EVIDENCE

Real-world studies add to the weight of evidence for PBM^9–12

The implementation of PBM has been shown to be associated with:

Reduced lengths of
hospital stay^9,10

Median length of stay was reduced from 10 days to 8 days (p<0.001) over a 6-year period in a US cardiac surgery centre*⁹
A 15% reduction in mean length of stay, after adjusting for confounders, was seen over a 6-year period in 4 major Australian hospitals^†10

Reduced RBC transfusions^10–12

Number of RBC units transfused per 1,000 patients decreased by 19.8%,^‡11 40%^§12and 41%^†10 in three different studies over 3.5- to 6-year periods

Reduced
healthcare costs^10–12

USD 78–97 M saved in activity-based transfusion costs following a 5-year health-system-wide PBM implementation in Australia^¶10
USD 12.44 M saved in blood-acquisition costs over 4 years at a Swiss hospital^¶12
USD 2.1 M saved in blood-acquisition costs per year across 5 US hospitals, calculated in the third year of the study^¶11

Data from individual studies cannot be directly compared due to differences in methodologies. 
Please see the study designs in the footnotes below and consult the full publications for further details.

WHO POLICY BRIEF AND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE

Why the world needs PBM

The WHO Policy Brief explains why PBM is urgently needed.¹ The implementation guidance helps achieve those benefits by turning that urgency into action, defining the steps, processes and resources needed to achieve improved global blood health status.¹³

WHO Policy Brief: 
The urgent need to implement PBM

as an overall framework to address the risks of
iron deficiency, anaemia, blood loss and coagulopathy¹

An estimated

1.3 billion people

suffer from

iron deficiency anaemia

worldwide^14–16

Up to 75% of surgical patients  suffer from pre-operative anaemia¹⁷

In surgical patients, anaemia is associated with:

Increased morbidity and mortality^17–19

Increased average length of  
hospital stay¹⁹

Diminished quality of life^20,21

PBM aims to improve patient outcomes whilst saving healthcare resources

The three key drivers for PBM are the 3 Es:¹

Evidence

Evidence of improved clinical outcomes with PBM¹⁰

Reduced lengths of hospital stay¹⁰

Reduced post-op infections¹⁰

Reduced RBC transfusions¹⁰

Reduced mortality rates¹⁰

Economic

PBM has demonstrated cost-effectiveness 
and alleviated cost constraints^11,22

PBM saved USD 18 M in blood product costs over 6 years in an Australian study^†10

This translated into USD 78 97 M activity-based cost savings^‖10

Ethical

There is an ethical obligation to not ignore and withhold a beneficial medical model^1,23

Improve patient
outcomes with PBM

READ THE FULL WHO POLICY BRIEF EXPLORE THE WHO PBM IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE

FIND OUT MORE

Learn more about PBM and how to implement it in your hospital

VIEW PBM WEBINARS

CSL Vifor is committed to helping hospitals implement PBM

CSL Vifor is a global leader in iron deficiency and anaemia management; a key component in PBM. For more than a decade we have partnered with international societies and hospitals to speed up the implementation of PBM across the world.

Footnotes and abbreviations

*A retrospective analysis (N=2,662) of two time periods in the database of the Cardiac Surgery Department of Eastern Maine Medical Center for all cardiac operations and a dedicated database developed for the PBM programme [pre-PBM (July 2006–March 2007) and PBM (April 2007–September 2012)].⁹
^†A retrospective, observational study of emergency and elective acute care adult inpatients admitted to four major tertiary‐care centres in Western Australia between 2008 and 2014 (N=605,046) to assess the impact of the PBM programme on key outcome measures.¹⁰
^‡An implementation study of PBM across the five major John Hopkins hospitals. Physician-led, this was a multidisciplinary, collaborative and quality-improvement team effort to reduce transfusion overuse. The number of patients included in this report was based on available data and no a priori power calculation was conducted. All measured outcomes of interest were assessed at monthly intervals. Blood and cost savings were calculated by comparing the most recent year (2017) to the baseline (2014).¹¹
^§A retrospective impact study (N=213,882: 66,659 baseline period, 35,309 post-implementation period, and 111,914 sustainability period) assessing the implementation of a hospital‐wide PBM monitoring and feedback programme at University Hospital of Zurich, from January 2012 to December 2017.¹²
^¶Cost-saving calculations are based on specific parameters dictated by individual healthcare systems and facilities.^10–12
^‖A gross savings estimation, when blood product cost and hospital costs of administering a transfusion are combined.¹⁰
PBM, Patient Blood Management; RBC, red blood cell; USD, United States dollar; WHO, World Health Organization.

References

World Health Organization. The urgent need to implement patient blood management: policy brief. 2021. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/346655 (last accessed August 2025).
European Commission. Building national programs of Patient Blood Management (PBM) in the EU. A Guide for Health Authorities. March 2017. Available from: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/5ec54745-1a8c-11e7-808e-01aa75ed71a1/language-en (last accessed August 2025).
Tibi P et al. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;112:981–1004.
Vaglio S et al. Blood Transfus. 2017;15:325–8.
National Blood Transfusion Committee. Patient Blood Management. An evidence-based approach to patient care. June 2014. Available from: https://www.infectedbloodinquiry.org.uk/evidence/witn7001027-patient-blood-management-26-jun-2014 (last accessed August 2025).
National Blood Authority Australia. National Patient Blood Management Implementation Strategy 2017–2024. June 2017. Available from: https://www.blood.gov.au/national-patient-blood-management-implementation-strategy-2017-2024 (last accessed August 2025).
Halvorsen S et al. Eur Heart J. 2022;43(39):3826–924.
Kietaibl S et al. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2023;40(4):226–304.
Gross I et al. Transfusion. 2015;55(5):1075–81.
Leahy MF et al. Transfusion. 2017;57(6):1347–58.
Frank SM et al. Anesthesiology. 2017;127:754–64.
Kaserer A et al. Anaesthesia. 2019;74:1534–41.
World Health Organization. Guidance on implementing patient blood management to improve global blood health status. Geneva 2024. Available from: https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/380784 (last accessed August 2025).
Vos T et al. Lancet. 2016;388:1545–602.
Vos T et al. Lancet. 2017;390:1211–59.
Kassebaum NJ et al. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2016;30:247–308.
Muñoz M et al. Br J Anaesth. 2015;115:15–24.
Fowler AJ et al. Br J Surg. 2015;102:1314–24.
Klein AA et al. Anaesthesia. 2016;71:627–35.
Strauss WE et al. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2018;9:285–98.
Anand IS et al. Circulation. 2018;138:80–98.
Weber CF et al. Anesthesiology. 2012;117:531–47.
Bolcato M et al. Transfus Apher Sci. 2020:102779.

Driven to improve patient outcomes and reduce hospital costs

EVIDENCE

Real-world studies add to the weight of evidence for PBM9–12

Reduced lengths of hospital stay9,10

Reduced RBC transfusions10–12

Reducedhealthcare costs10–12

Real-world studies add to the weight of evidence for PBM^9–12

Reduced lengths of
hospital stay^9,10

Reduced RBC transfusions^10–12

Reduced
healthcare costs^10–12