Ethical considerations in the use of RhD‐positive blood products in trauma

Prehospital and early in-hospital use of low titer group O whole blood (LTOWB) for life-threatening bleeding has been independently associated with improved survival compared to component therapy. However, when RhD-positive blood products are administered to RhD-negative females of childbearing potential (FCP), there is a small future risk of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN). This raises important ethical questions that must be explored in order to justify the use of RhD-positive blood products, including LTOWB, both in clinical practice and research.This essay explores the ethical challenges related to RhD-positive blood product administration to RhD-negative or RhD-unknown FCPs as a first-line resuscitation fluid in the trauma setting. These ethical issues include: issues related to decision-making, ethical analysis based on the doctrine of double effect (DDE), and attendant obligations incurred by hospitals that administer RhD-positive blood to FCPs.Ethical analysis through the use of the DDE demonstrates that utilization of RhD-positive blood products, including LTOWB, in the early resuscitation of FCPs is an ethically appropriate approach. By accepting the risk of HDFN, hospitals generate obligations to promote blood donation, evaluate for alloimmunization and counsel patients on the future risk of HDFN, and maintain an understanding of the ethical rationale for RhD-positive blood transfusion.