National Hemovigilance Programme aims at improving patient and donor outcomes by monitoring adverse reactions. This requires an additional effort by existing manpower that is already a handful and may offer a leeway if not mandated and designated to a hemovigilance nurse.

To analyse the reported adverse transfusion reactions (ATR) and their subsequent uplink/upload into the Hemovigilance program of India (HvPI) and to observe subjective discrepancy in the diagnosis of ATR and their imputability to transfusion.

ATR were analysed from May 2016 to October 2021 in a hospital-based blood centre in India. Two groups were formed, Group I constituted ATR that were reported and uplinked to HvPI, and Group II constituted all reported ATR irrespective of the uplink/upload. All ATR were reanalysed for a subjective discrepancy in diagnosis and imputability levels. Results were analysed online statistical software MedCalc using the “Exact Poissons Method” and the Chi-square test with a significant p-value of <0.05.

In total 169 ATR were reported in 166 patients and 89 (52.6%) were uplinked, with an incident rate of 1 in 1412 and 1 in 743 in Group I and Group II respectively. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Allergic reactions were the most common type in both groups followed by FNHTR with PRBC as the most implicated blood product. A discrepancy of around 4.3% and 17.9% in diagnosis and imputability level respectively was observed.

The difference in incidence rates in the two groups indicates a mandate for dedicated hemovigilance nurses in every centre to aid in accurate data sharing with the National hemovigilance systems. Discrepancies in diagnosis can be mitigated by identification and understanding of ATR through case-based objective approach. Discrepancy in assigning imputability levels to adverse reactions can be minimised by objectifying the scales followed by spreading awareness though campaigns. These initiatives can effectively be aided by the hemovigilance nurse.