Barriers and motivators to blood and cord blood donations in young African-American women

The primary aim of this study was to assess potential barriers and motivators to blood and cord blood donation among African-American women. A telephone survey of African-American women, ages 18-30 years, in the St. Louis metropolitan area was performed. The survey was administered by trained telemarketing personnel using a Computer-Assisted Direct Interview (CADI) system. One hundred sixty-two women were surveyed. Common barriers to blood donation were inconvenience of donor sites (19%), fear of needles (16%), and too much time required to donate (15%). Potential motivators were increasing awareness of need for blood (43%), increasing the number of convenient donor locations (19%), and encouragement by spiritual leaders to have blood drives at their church (17%). Lack of awareness was the only identified barrier to cord blood donation. Most women surveyed (88%) indicated that they definitely or probably would donate cord blood. Strategies to increase the proportion of African-American blood and cord blood donations may include educating potential donors about the process and benefits of donation to particular patient populations and engaging church leadership in supporting blood and cord blood donations.     

Exposure to hepatitis A virus among blood donors, injecting drug users and prison entrants in Victoria

To assess prevalence of exposure to hepatitis A virus (HAV) among injecting drug users (IDUs) and prison entrants in Victoria, and to compare this with prevalence of HAV among a reference population of blood donors, sera stored from two previous studies and from randomly selected blood donors were tested for total antibody to HAV. The first study was a longitudinal study of field-recruited IDUs from 1990 to 1992 and the second was a study of all prison entrants in 1991–92 (both studies were carried out in Victoria); blood donors were from the Australian Red Cross Blood Bank Victoria in 1995. Forty five per cent of 2175 prison entrants and 51% of 293 IDUs were seropositive for HAV, compared with 30% of 2995 blood donors. When standardized for age against the blood donors, HAV seropositivity in IDUs was 44% and in prison entrants 60%. The strongest association of HAV seropositivity among the IDUs on multivariate analysis was a history of imprisonment. There are high rates of exposure to HAV among prison entrants, whether with a history of IDU or not, and among IDUs who have a prison history. The role of sharing contaminated injecting equipment in transmission of HAV seems to be less important than institutionalization per se. With adequate resourcing, both populations are appropriate targets for HAV vaccination, especially in a context of continuing decline of transmission of HAV in the general community.     

Paying for blood donations: still a risk?

It is presently disputed whether studies indicating a higher risk of infectious diseases among paid blood donors are lessons of the past, or still hold relevance. Comparative studies published between 1968 and 2001 were assessed for a possible trend of change in the relative risk for infectious disease markers between paid and unpaid blood or plasma donors. Studies reporting that paid donors had lower risk were found, but most studies, including recent ones, continued to report that paid donors have higher rates of infectious disease markers than unpaid donors. By log-linear regression analysis of the relative risk estimates for infectious disease markers among paid and unpaid donors from 28 published data sets, evidence was not found to indicate that the difference in risk for infectious disease markers between paid donors and unpaid donors had diminished over time (P = 0.128, not significant). Paid donors are still more likely than unpaid donors to donate blood in the period during which infectious donations escape detection by blood-screening tests (the "window-period"). Therefore, paid donations have a higher risk that labile blood components (such as red blood cells and platelets) are infected. Additional safety measures for handling plasma donations, and the preparation, purification and viral-inactivation steps employed for the production of plasma derivatives, may render the difference in infectious disease marker rates in donors irrelevant for plasma products. However, not all viruses are inactivated and paid donors were repeatedly found to have higher frequencies of markers for emerging agents. In a quality system, critical steps of the process should be addressed, and selection of the donor population is one of the first steps in this process. It is advised that blood establishments present yearly reports (with complete and raw data) to authorities on the incidence and prevalence of infectious disease markers among their donors as an ongoing surveillance on the "quality" of their donor populations. Paid blood or plasma donors still have higher rates for infectious disease markers than unpaid donors.