Whole blood donor deferral rate and characteristics of the Turkish population

Whole blood (WB) donors are deferred for several reasons, either permanently or temporarily. In this retrospective study, we quantified the rate of and reasons for donor deferral among Turkish donors. Computer records of the last 5 years were analysed to quantify the deferral rate and reasons. Deferrals were categorized as temporary short-term (1-56 days), long-term (57-365 days) and multiple years or permanent (more than 365 days). Deferred donors were also analysed according to gender, age and education level. A total of 95 317 persons were admitted for WB donation: 89.1% of them were male donors and 59.9% were in the 30 to 49-year old age category. Rates of deferral for temporary short-term, long-term, permanent or for unknown reasons were 66, 22.5, 10 and 1.5% respectively. Female donors were deferred more frequently than male donors (25.8 vs. 13.3%, P 0.05). The main reason for deferral was common cold and/or sore throat or elevated temperature (20.4%) in male donors and low haemoglobin (51.6%) in female donors. Although the three uppermost reasons for deferral in women were identical for all age categories, these varied in the male group (high-risk sex partner for the younger group vs. hypertension and low haemoglobin for the older group). Although permanent and temporary deferral rates are similar between the Turkish population and western countries, leading causes vary widely.     

The consequences of temporary deferral on future whole blood donation

BACKGROUND: The consequences of temporary deferral are not well understood. This study sought to investigate blood donor return after deferral expiration. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of allogeneic whole-blood donation was conducted. All deferred donors and a random sample of eligible donors were identified from the year 2000, with subsequent blood center visits through December 2005 captured. Stratified results are reported as the percentage returning, rates of return, and time to return. Measures of statistical association and Cox regression modeling are reported. RESULTS: For first-time (FT) donors, 25 percent of temporarily deferred donors returned during the 5-year follow-up period compared to 47 percent of eligible donors (p < 0.0001); for repeat donors, 81 and 86 percent of deferred and eligible donors returned, respectively (p < 0.0001). Depending on the deferral category, 14 to 31 percent of FT and 58 to 90 percent of repeat donors returned. Rates (per year) of successful donation during the follow-up period were 0.09 for index-deferred FT donors, 0.28 for eligible FT donors, 1.0 for deferred repeat donors, and 1.45 for eligible repeat donors. Multivariate modeling indicated that in addition to deferral, age, sex, race, and education were associated with return in both FT and repeat donors. CONCLUSION: The effects of deferral were more pronounced than expected, affecting both FT and repeat donors. For FT donors, the type and duration of deferral, while important, were not as relevant as hypothesized because so few returned, suggesting the need to develop appropriate interventions to recapture those donors likely to be eligible.     

Characteristics and causes of pre-donation deferrals at a Chinese blood center

ObjectivesThe purpose of this retrospective analysis was to understand the causes and characteristics of the pre-donation deferral, so as to enhance blood safety and improve donor satisfaction.BackgroundBlood transfusion is crucial in managing a variety of different medical and surgical needs. Its benefits are manifold but there are risks for the recipients. Thus some blood donors are deferred from donating when they do not meet certain criteria. An in-depth understanding of the underlying causes of donor deferral will not only improve donor selection but also ensure blood safety and avoid donor complaints.Materials and methodsThis single-center experience was carried out from 26th July 2018 to 25th July 2019 on all whole blood donors in Tianjin, China. Donors’ demographics and information were retrieved; comparisons between deferral data were summarized by the Chi-square test using Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) application version 22. The difference between groups were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05.ResultsA total of 190,846 participants were included; whereby 119,951 (62.85 %) of participants were first-time blood donors. The pre-donation deferral rate was 9.26 %, and deferral was more likely seen in first-time donors, male donors, and donors of age above 35 years (p < 0.05). Overall, raised alanine aminotransferase (ALT) contributed to 48.46 % of all temporary deferrals, followed by lipaemia (20.71 %). For female donors, low hemoglobin was the leading cause of temporary deferral. Positive hepatitis B surface antigen (Hepatitis B) and syphilis were the two common causes of permanent deferrals, with incidence at 11.65 % and 3.93 %, respectively.ConclusionPre-donation deferral remains a significant problem in China and accounted for 9.26 % of participants in this study. Raised ALT and lipaemia were common temporary deferrals, especially among first-time donors, males, and older donors. Appropriate interventions should be taken to address the blood quality, improve the donor retention strategies in order to secure an adequate and safe blood supply.     

Quantifying losses to the donated blood supply due to donor deferral and miscollection

BACKGROUND: Donors are deferred for multiple reasons. Losses related to disease marker rates are well established. Donor and donation losses for other reasons, however, have not been extensively quantified. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: To quantify these losses, three data sets from the Blood Centers of the Pacific were combined, permitting detailed analysis of year 2000 allogeneic whole-blood donations. RESULTS: During 2000, 13.6 percent of 116,165 persons who presented for donation were deferred at presentation. Short-term deferral accounted for 68.5 percent (hematocrit was most common at 60%); long-term deferral accounted for 21 percent (travel to a malarial area and tattoo or other nonintravenous drug use needle exposure were most common at 59 and 29%, respectively); and multiple-year or permanent deferral accounted for 10.5 percent (UK travel [variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease] risk and emigration from a malarial area were most common at 38 and 11%, respectively). Disease-marker-reactive donations represented 0.9 percent of donor outcomes. The prevalence of deferral and also miscollection (under- and overweight units) varied by age, sex, and first-time versus repeat donor status. Overall, miscollection led to a loss of 3.8 percent of 100,141 collections, ranging from 1.9 percent in repeat male donors 40 to 54 years of age to 10.7 percent in first-time female donors 16 to 24 years of age. CONCLUSION: Loss of units from both first-time and repeat donors due to temporary deferral and loss of units from miscollection are more common events than losses due to disease marker testing. Some of these losses may be avoidable and could increase the blood supply without having to recruit new donors.     

Donor deferral and resulting donor loss at the American Red Cross Blood Services, 2001 through 2006

BACKGROUND: A large number of blood donors are deferred each year and many of the temporarily deferred donors do not return to donate blood. This study analyzed actual deferral and return donation data from the American Red Cross to further assess the impact of donor deferral on donor availability. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Voluntary blood donors who presented between 2001 and 2006 were included in this study. Deferred donors were classified into three groups according to their history of presentation during the prior 2 years: Group 1 with no prior donation or deferral, Group 2 with prior donation but no deferral, and Group 3 with prior deferral. Temporarily deferred donors in Groups 1 and 2 who did not return during the next 3 years were considered lost donors. All indefinitely deferred donors were lost donors. RESULTS: A mean of 12.8 percent of a total of 47,814,370 donor presentations between 2001 and 2006 resulted in a deferral. While majority of the deferrals were related to donor safety reasons, deferrals for recipient safety reasons accounted for 22.6 percent of deferrals or 2.9 percent of total presentations. Temporary and indefinite deferrals for recipient safety‐related reasons collectively caused an estimated loss of 647,828 donors during the 6 years. An additional 1,042,743 donors were lost due to deferrals for donor safety‐related reasons during the same period. CONCLUSIONS: The results on donor loss after deferral call attention to the impact of donor deferrals on donor availability and the need to monitor and assess the necessity and effectiveness of such deferrals.     

Temporary deferral and donor return

Deferral from donation is usually for conditions that make the donor only temporarily unable to give. Based on questionnaires given to 1247 donors with subsequent follow-up of their donation records for 6 months, permanent psychological effects of deferral are suggested. Only one of 36 deferred first-time donors (2.8%) compared with 27.3 percent of those who were not deferred returned for a second donation during the next 6 months. Among most first-time donors, temporary deferral may be interpreted psychologically as providing a permanent excuse for not donating.     

Analysis of donor-deferral pattern in a voluntary blood donor population

SUMMARY. A reterospective analysis of records of the deferred donors from 1 October 1992 to 31 December 1993 was performed. Of 14,269 prospective blood donors (13,030 males and 1,239 females), 2,431 (16.4%) donors were disqualified for various reasons: 8-1% of the donors were deferred for non-pathological causes while 91-9% were deferred for medical reasons. The most common cause for non-pathological deferral was volunteers attending below the minimum acceptable age (5-2%). Abnormal findings on physical examination accounted for 57-2% of the deferrals in which low body weight was the most common finding (32-3%) followed by low Hb (18-6%). A past history of jaundice was the leading cause for deferral on medical interview.
Numerous prospective donors are currently being deferred based on empirically derived criteria. By developing strategies to identify and rationalize donor selection criteria, the blood transfusion services should be able to decrease unnecessary deferrals.     

Demographic variations in blood donor deferrals in a major metropolitan area

BACKGROUND: Presenting blood donors are screened to ensure both their safety and that of the recipients of blood products. Donors with identified risks are deferred from donating blood either temporarily or permanently. Minorities are underrepresented as donors in the United States and this may in part be a result of increased donor deferral rates in minorities compared to white individuals. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data consisted of deferred and successful blood donor presentations to the American Red Cross Southern Region in the metropolitan Atlanta area in 2004 to 2008. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted by race/ethnicity, age group, and sex. RESULTS: A total of 586,159 voluntary donor presentations occurred in 2004 to 2008, of which 79,214 (15.6%) resulted in deferral. In the age 16 to 69 years subset (98.3% of the presentations), deferred presentations were mostly women (78.2%). The most common reason for donor deferral was low hemoglobin (62.6%). The donor deferral rate varied by race/ethnicity, age, and sex: whites (11.1%), Hispanics (14.1%), and African Americans (17.9%); 16‐ to 19‐year‐olds (17.0%) and 50‐ to 59‐year‐olds (11.7%); and females (20.0%) and males (6.2%). Compared to whites and Hispanics, African American females had the highest deferral rate in each age group. CONCLUSIONS: Minorities are disproportionately impacted by blood donor deferrals. Methods to decrease blood donor deferral rates among African Americans are needed.     

The impact of temporary deferral due to low hemoglobin: future return,time to return,and frequency of subsequent donation

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the effects of a 6‐month deferral due to low hemoglobin (Hb) on the subsequent donation patterns of Australian whole blood donors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The study was a retrospective cohort study of the donation patterns of all whole blood donors deferred for low Hb during a 2‐month period compared with donors who were not deferred. Donations 3 years after eligibility to give blood were recorded. Analysis of proportion returning, time to return, and frequency of donation was performed using logistic regression, survival analysis, and negative binomial regression. RESULTS: Among first‐time donors, 20.9% of low Hb–deferred donors returned during the follow‐up period versus 69.9% of those not deferred. Among repeat donors, 64.0% of deferred donors returned versus 91.0% of those not deferred. Temporary deferral delayed time to first return (p < 0.001), reduced frequency of donation (2.4 donations per donor before deferral compared to 1.1 per donor in first year of follow‐up), and increased the likelihood of dropping out in later years of follow‐up. However, if a donor returned promptly once eligible and gave more donations in the first year, the negative impact on future donation patterns was diminished. High frequency of attendance before deferral was the strongest predictor of time to return and future donation frequency. CONCLUSION: Deferral for low Hb had a strong effect on first‐time and repeat donors. This study highlights the influence of strong donation habits on return after deferral and the importance of encouraging donors to return promptly once eligible.     

False‐reactive microbiologic screening test results in Swedish blood donors—how big is the problem? A survey among blood centers and deferred donors

BACKGROUND: Screening of blood donors for markers of transfusion-transmissible infectious agents leads to a varying number of false-reactive test results and sometimes thereby temporary or permanent deferral of donors and also to loss of collected units. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data on false-reactive screening test results in 2002 and 2003 were collected from 19 blood centers in Sweden. A questionnaire was sent to donors deferred because of false-reactive screening test results to investigate their perception of the information and their reaction to the deferral. RESULTS: Testing of 21,189 samples from new donors and 423,543 donations from regular and/or repeat donors produced 1,059 false-reactive test results, mostly from hepatitis C virus antibody testing, and 299 deferrals. Six different human immunodeficiency virus tests led to between 0.02 and 0.2 percent false-reactive results. The deferral rate varied considerably between different counties. Of 204 deferred donors contacted, 180 (88%) answered the questionnaire. More than 80 percent were worried about their test results and worry was more common among those who did not feel sufficiently informed. CONCLUSION: The results imply that there is a need for a more standardized approach to the screening of blood donors and donations with the aim of minimizing the number of false-reactive screening test results. They also emphasize the importance of appropriate information and support to deferred donors.     

Hemoglobin and iron indices in nonanemic premenopausal blood donors predict future deferral from whole blood donation

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency anemia is an important reason for blood donor deferral. We prospectively determined whether screening donors with hemoglobin (Hb) and iron indices before donation can predict subsequent deferral due to anemia. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We recruited premenopausal, eligible (nonanemic) female donors. Hb, ferritin, soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR), and hepcidin were measured, and the sTfR/(log)ferritin (sTfR‐F) index was calculated. After 6 months, the donor database was reviewed and whether donors had returned and undergone successful donation was recorded. RESULTS: Of donors, 59 of 261(22.6%) were iron depleted (ferritin < 15 ng/mL). Iron‐depleted donors had donated more often in the previous year, were younger, and had lower Hb. After a minimum of 6 months, 145 eligible donors had returned; of these 10 (6.9%) were deferred for anemia. Donors who developed anemia had significantly lower Hb, ferritin, and hepcidin and higher sTfR and sTfR‐F at baseline. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for Hb as a predictor of deferral was 0.86, and for ferritin was 0.88. Hb of less than 130 g/L and ferritin of less than 10 ng/mL combined had sensitivity 80% and specificity 96% in predicting deferral. CONCLUSION: Screening with Hb and iron indices enables prediction of donors at risk of subsequent anemia and who would most benefit from prevention strategies.     

Donor return after temporary deferral

BACKGROUND: The consequences of temporary predonation deferral are unsatisfactorily understood. Studies have found that deferral negatively impacts future donor return. However, the applicability of these findings across centers has not been established. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using a cohort design, presenting donors with a temporary deferral in 2006 to 2008 in one of six categories (low hematocrit [Hct], blood pressure or pulse, feeling unwell, malaria travel, tattoos or piercing and related exposures, or could not wait or second thoughts) were passively followed for up to a 3‐year period for the time to first return after deferral expiration at six US blood centers. Time‐to‐event methods were used to assess return. We also analyzed which donor characteristics were associated with return using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 3.9 million donor presentations, 505,623 resulted in deferral in the six categories. Low Hct was the most common deferral, had the shortest median time to return (time in days when 50% of deferred donors had returned), and had the largest cumulative proportion of donors returning. Deferrals of shorter duration had better return. Longer‐term deferrals (up to 1 year in length) had the lowest cumulative return proportion, which did not exceed 50%. Return was associated with previously identified factors such as repeat donor status, older age, and higher educational attainment regardless of the type of deferral. In addition, return was associated with having been born in the United States and donation at fixed sites. CONCLUSION: The category of temporary deferral influences the likelihood of future return, but the demographic and donation factors associated with return are largely consistent regardless of the deferral.     

Influence of climate on donor deferrals

The purpose of this study was to ascertain the cause for seasonal variations of donor deferral. Deferred donors and monthly temperatures from 1981 to 1984 were tallied and analyzed. Temperatures were categorized at 10-degree intervals from 15 degrees F to 75 degrees F. Donors failing the hemoglobin screening then underwent a microhematocrit evaluation. Of the 65,531 donors seen at this blood center, 4537 were deferred, for an annual deferral rate of 6.7 to 7.2 percent (p less than 0.1). Deferrals for low hematocrit were significantly higher for both sexes at and above 45 degrees F. Similar experiences were also observed in 79,563 donors who came to the bloodmobiles over 19 months in 1983 and 1984. The percentages of deferrals at the blood center for low hematocrit in 1984 were 1.22, 2.6, and 3.5 for men and 6.7, 11.3, and 13.2 for the women at monthly average temperatures of 15.1 to 45 degrees F, 45.1 to 65 degrees F, and 65.1 to 75 degrees F, respectively. These differences of deferral rates are significant (p less than 0.05-0.001). Although other personal demographics remained constant, more of the donors deferred in this study had also been deferred in the past. The climatic changes had a significant effect on the blood composition that resulted in the deferral of blood donors with a borderline low hematocrit.     

Low hemoglobin deferral in blood donors

Low hemoglobin deferral occurs in about 10% of attempted whole blood donations and commonly is a consequence of iron deficiency anemia. Pre-menopausal women often have iron deficiency anemia caused by menstruation and pregnancy and have low hemoglobin deferral on their first donation attempt. Frequent donors also develop iron deficiency and iron deficiency anemia because blood donation removes a large amount of iron from the donor and the 56-day minimum inter-donation interval for donors in the United States is not sufficient for recovery of hemoglobin and iron stores. Other causes for low hemoglobin deferral range from a medically insignificant deferral of a woman with hemoglobin between 12.0 and 12.4 g/dL, which is within the normal reference range but below the 12.5 g/dL needed to donate blood, to anemia caused by an unrecognized malignancy in a “healthy” individual attempting to donate blood. The diverse causes of anemia in blood donors make it difficult to provide accurate information to donors about the cause of their low hemoglobin deferral and complicate implementation of programs to prevent them by blood collecting agencies. This article reviews how hemoglobin is measured and the demographics and causes of low hemoglobin deferral in blood donors. It provides recommendations for how blood collection agencies can provide donors with accurate information about the cause of their deferral and discusses programs that can be implemented to decrease these deferrals in regular donors.     

Community blood donors' knowledge of anemia and design of a literacy-appropriate educational intervention

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this project is to improve the health of blood donors by educating and motivating them to seek medical attention for anemia. The National Anemia Action Council, BloodCenter of Wisconsin, and the Medical College of Wisconsin formed a partnership to engage volunteer blood donors and develop an educational intervention to motivate donors with anemia to seek appropriate medical care.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Partners developed an educational pamphlet and conducted two focus groups with volunteer blood donors for feedback. Participants were recruited from volunteer donors at BloodCenter of Wisconsin found to have anemia (men age, 18 years and older with a hematocrit [Hct] level of <38%; women age 50 years and older with a Hct level of <36%) at blood screening before donation.
RESULTS: Participants (n = 25) addressed their understanding of anemia, information they received after being deferred, their reactions about the deferral, and comments on the educational material. The educational pamphlet was revised based on focus group comments.
CONCLUSION: Volunteer donors are extremely dedicated and interested in increasing their understanding of anemia and the ability to continue donation. Community members' feedback on educational material is a valuable resource to improve the literacy level of information.     

Effects of new brochures on blood donor recruitment and retention

BACKGROUND: Currently, donors may arrive at blood collection sites without prior knowledge of eligibility and deferral criteria. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The effects of distributing newly developed recruitment brochures 2 weeks in advance of blood drives and the provision of brochures on temporary deferral at the taking of health history were examined in four southeastern regional blood collection centers. Twenty-four similar pairs of worksites, with employee-only recruitment, were randomly assigned to a control (C) or experimental (E) group. Information about sponsor recruitment strategies, worksite factors, and first-time, repeat, and temporarily deferred donors was obtained at three collection drives per site over a 1-year period. Drive 1 was used as a baseline. Two weeks before Drives 2 and 3, the recruitment brochures were distributed to all Group E employees, with temporary deferral brochures provided as needed when the health history was taken. RESULTS: No significant differences between groups or drives were found in the total percentage of employees recruited or returning as a result of recruitment or deferral brochure distribution (Wilcoxon's signed rank test and t test). Substantiating previous observations by donor recruiters, the study results showed decreased donations during vacation periods and busier times at the workplace. Loudspeaker announcements led to decreased donations; increased donations followed special appeals in relation to a specific patient, an accident, or a natural disaster. CONCLUSION: The brochures may have encouraged previous donors to return, but their use did not significantly increase the recruitment of new donors or the return of temporarily deferred donors.     

The effect of short-term, temporary deferral on future blood donation

BACKGROUND: Most blood donor deferrals are temporary and short-term. The effect of short-term, temporary deferral (STTD) on blood donor return rates and subsequent blood donations is an important issue. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Donors given STTDs during the first 3 months of 1993 were computer-matched with nondeferred donors on the basis of age, sex, and donation date. Computer records were evaluated during the next 4.25 years (4/93-6/97) to determine donor return rates and subsequent blood donations. RESULTS: The most common reasons STTD were low hemoglobin (46%), colds and/or sore throats (19%), and elevated temperature (10%). Nondeferred donors were 29 percent more likely than donors with STTD to return over the next 4.25 years (80% vs. 62%), and nondeferred donors donated 81 percent more whole blood units (13,798 vs. 7,615) over the same period. CONCLUSION: The study showed that STTD have a very negative impact on blood donor return rates and subsequent blood donations. Actions to alleviate these negative effects are indicated.     

Risk for malaria in United States donors deferred for travel to malaria-endemic areas

BACKGROUND: Deferral for travel to malaria-endemic areas excludes many blood donors in the United States. Most transfusion-transmitted malaria is associated with lengthy residence in malaria-endemic areas rather than routine travel. This study compares the impact of existing deferral requirements to the risk that a presenting donor with malaria travel history harbors malaria parasites under current and hypothetical alternate regulations.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Deferred donors from six blood centers were sampled to estimate a national cohort of donors deferred annually for malaria travel to different geographic regions. Risk for malaria infection after travel to each region and distribution of incubation periods for each malaria species were estimated for US travelers. Region-specific travel risks were used to estimate the risk that a presenting blood donor with malaria travel might asymptomatically harbor malaria parasites at different intervals after return to the United States.
RESULTS: Travel to Africa presents risk for malaria infection greater than 1000 times that of travel to malaria-endemic parts of Mexico, yet Mexico accounts for more than 10 times as many deferred donors. Shortening the deferral period from 12 to 3 months for travelers to Mexico increases the risk of collecting a contaminated unit by only 1 unit per 57 years (sensitivity analysis, 1 every 29-114 years), at annual gain of more than 56,000 donations.
CONCLUSION: This study provides the first systematic appraisal of the US requirements for donor qualification regarding travel to malarial areas. Consideration should be given to relaxing the guidelines for travel to very-low-risk areas such as Mexico.     

Transfusion safety in francophone African countries: an analysis of strategies for the medical selection of blood donors

BACKGROUND: The goal of selecting a healthy blood donor is to safeguard donors and reduce the risks of infections and immunologic complications for recipients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: To evaluate the blood donor selection process, a survey was conducted in 28 blood transfusion centers located in 15 francophone African countries. Data collected included availability of blood products, risk factors for infection identified among blood donor candidates, the processing of the information collected before blood collection, the review process for the medical history of blood donor candidates, and deferral criteria for donor candidates. RESULTS: During the year 2009, participating transfusion centers identified 366,924 blood donor candidates. A mean of 13% (range, 0%‐36%) of the donor candidates were excluded based solely on their medical status. The main risk factors for blood‐borne infections were having multiple sex partners, sexual intercourse with occasional partners, and religious scarification. Most transfusion centers collected this information verbally instead of having a written questionnaire. The topics least addressed were the possible complications relating to the donation, religious scarifications, and history of sickle cell anemia and hemorrhage. Only three centers recorded the temperature of the blood donors. The deferral criteria least reported were sickle cell anemia, piercing, scarification, and tattoo. CONCLUSIONS: The medical selection process was not performed systemically and thoroughly enough, given the regional epidemiologic risks. It is essential to identify the risk factors specific to francophone African countries and modify the current medical history questionnaires to develop a more effective and relevant selection process.