The effectiveness of the confidential unit exclusion option

BACKGROUND: The confidential unit exclusion (CUE) option is intended to reduce human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission by excluding donors newly infected with HIV who have not yet developed HIV antibody (window-period donors); however, its efficacy in excluding window- period donors has not been evaluated. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The use of the CUE option was studied among the donors of 3.7 million units at 18 American Red Cross blood services regions during 1991 and 1992 and among 322 previously HIV-1-seronegative donors who subsequently donated a seropositive unit between 1987 and 1990 at 40 United States blood centers. These seroconverting donors had previously been shown to be highly likely to donate during their window period. RESULTS: On the basis of data from these two populations, it was estimated that only 3 to 5 percent of units donated by window-period donors were not transfused because of the CUE option, that 0.4 percent of all donations were from donors who confidentially excluded their blood from transfusion, and that donors who confidentially excluded their blood were 21 times more likely to be HIV antibody-positive than donors who did not use the CUE option. It is estimated that, if all US blood centers used the CUE option, a total of 2 to 17 otherwise acceptable units donated by window-period donors would not be transfused annually. CONCLUSION: Although donors who confidentially exclude their blood from transfusion are 21 times more likely to have HIV antibody, the rarity of window-period donors and the infrequency of confidential exclusion by window-period donors cause the CUE option to have minimal impact on transfusion safety.     

Demographic characteristics and prevalence of serologic markers among blood donors who use confidential unit exclusion (CUE) in São Paulo,Brazil: implications for modification of CUE polices in Brazil

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated demographic profiles and prevalence of serologic markers among donors who used confidential unit exclusion (CUE) to assess the effectiveness of CUE and guide public policies regarding the use of CUE for enhancing safety versus jeopardizing the blood supply by dropping CUE. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a cross‐sectional analysis of whole blood donations at a large public blood center in São Paulo from July 2007 through June 2009, compared demographic data, and confirmed serologic results among donors who used and who have never used CUE (CUE never). RESULTS: There were 265,550 whole blood units collected from 181,418 donors from July 2007 through June 2009. A total of 9658 (3.6%) units were discarded, 2973 (1.1%) because CUE was used at the current donation (CUE now) and 6685 (2.5%) because CUE was used in the past (CUE past). The CUE rate was highest among donors with less than 8 years of education (odds ratio [OR], 2.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.51‐3.08). CUE now donations were associated with higher positive infectious disease marker rates than CUE never donations (OR, 1.41; CI, 1.13‐1.77), whereas CUE past donations were not (OR, 1.04; CI, 0.75‐1.45). CONCLUSION: The CUE process results in a high rate of unit discard. CUE use on an individual donation appears predictive of a high‐risk marker‐positive donation and, thus, appears to contribute modestly to blood safety. The policy of discarding units from donors who have previously CUE‐positive donations does not improve safety and should be discontinued.     

Demographic characteristics and prevalence of serologic markers among donors who use the confidential unit exclusion process: the Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study

BACKGROUND: Most blood centers utilize a confidential unit exclusion (CUE) process, intended to reduce the risk of transfusion-associated infectious diseases by allowing high-risk donors confidentially to exclude their blood from use for transfusion. The effectiveness of this method remains controversial. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Confirmatory or supplemental test results for antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus, human T-lymphotropic virus type I, and hepatitis C virus, as well as hepatitis B surface antigen and syphilis and screening test results for antibodies to hepatitis B core (antigen) and alanine aminotransferase levels were obtained for approximately 1.8 million units donated during 1991 and 1992 at five blood centers within the United States. The prevalences of these infectious disease markers in units that the donors confidentially excluded (CUE+) and units that the donors did not exclude (CUE-) were calculated and examined within demographic subgroups. RESULTS: Units that were CUE+ were 8 to 41 times more likely to be seropositive for antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B surface antigen, and syphilis and three to four times more likely to react for antibody to hepatitis B core (antigen) or to have elevated alanine aminotransferase levels than units that were CUE- (p < 0.001). The positive predictive value of CUE (the percentage of CUE+ units that were confirmed seropositive for any marker) was 3.5 percent, and the sensitivity of CUE (the percentage of confirmed-seropositive units that were CUE+) was 2.3 percent. CONCLUSION: The current CUE process has low sensitivity and apparently low positive predictive value, and in many cases, it appeared that donors misunderstood it. Yet, CUE was not a “random process,” as CUE+ units were more likely to be seropositive for any infectious disease marker than CUE- units. This suggests that efforts to improve the CUE system may be warranted. As risk factors for transfusion-transmitted infection become more difficult to identify by history-based screening, however, such efforts may have limited effect.     

Potential increased risk of virus transmission due to exclusion of older donors because of concern over Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study

BACKGROUND: Concern over the theoretical possibility of disease transmission via blood from donors who develop Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease has led to proposals to exclude older individuals from donating plasma for further manufacture into pooled plasma donations. The impact of extending this age-deferral policy to blood donors was examined with respect to the risk for known transmissible viruses. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Demographic characteristics and confirmed prevalence rates (/10(5) first-time donations) and incidence rates (/10(5) person-years for repeat donors) for viral markers were compared for donors < 50 years old (n = 1,259,805 [85%]) and > or = 50 years old (n = 219,856 [15%]) and for donors < 60 years old (n = 1,409,176 [95%]) and > or = 60 years old (n = 70,485 [5%]). Incidence rates were combined with infectious window-period estimates for each virus, to calculate the risk of virus transmission per 10(6) donations. RESULTS: Unadjusted prevalence rates were significantly greater for younger than for older donor groups for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) (p < or = 0.05). Incidence rates (and transmission risk estimates) for HBsAg were significantly higher in the < 50 donor group than in the > or = 50 group (p < or = 0.05), and those for HIV, human T-lymphotropic virus, and HCV were not significantly higher (p > 0.05). Blanket removal of donors over the age of 50 would potentially lead to the following significant increases in the risk of infected units: HIV, 12 percent; HCV, 21 percent; and hepatitis B virus (HBsAg), 22 percent. CONCLUSION: Removal of donors over the age of 60 would not significantly affect the risk of infected units. Deferral of donors > or = 50 years of age from whole-blood donations for unfounded concerns about Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease could have adverse effects on both blood availability and safety.     

Prevalence of selected viral infections among temporarily deferred donors who returned to donate blood: American Red Cross blood donor study

BACKGROUND: Health history questions are introduced into the predonation interview to identify blood donors believed to pose a higher risk of infectious diseases to recipients. This study assesses the current impact of some of those questions. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Donor deferral and donation data were extracted from a research database of the American Red Cross. The prevalence of hepatitis B surface antigen or antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis C virus, or human T-lymphotropic virus was obtained for different groups of donors who were temporarily deferred in 2000 through 2001 and later returned to donate blood in 2000 through 2003. The results were compared with either first-time or repeat donors in 2000 through 2003, while controlling for differences in sex, age, and year of donation. RESULTS: Of donors temporarily deferred in 2000 through 2001 who had had no donation or deferral during the previous 2 years, only 22.08 percent subsequently returned to donate blood in 2000 through 2003. Donations from returning donors who had been deferred for potential infectious disease risk did not show a higher prevalence for any of the viral markers when those with no donation or deferral during the previous two years were compared with first-time donations, and those with prior donation were compared with repeat donations. CONCLUSION: Blood donors temporarily deferred in 2000 through 2001 for potential risk of viral infection who later returned to donate blood did not appear to pose a higher risk compared to first-time or repeat donors. The effectiveness of some of the currently used deferral questions in reducing viral risks warrants further study.     

Frequency of HBV DNA detection in US blood donors testing positive for the presence of anti-HBc: implications for transfusion transmission and donor screening

BACKGROUND: An estimate of the rate of HBV DNA-positive, anti-HBc-positive units is important for evaluating the need for anti-HBc donor screening, especially in the context of HBV NAT. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: HBsAg EIA-nonreactive, anti-HBc-reactive (Corzyme, Abbott Laboratories) specimens were retrieved from a repository and were retested for anti-HBc (with PRISM HBcore, Abbott Laboratories, currently under FDA review) and anti-HBs (with PRISM Ausab, Abbott Laboratories, research assay). HBV DNA testing using a PCR assay with a greater than 95 percent detection rate of less than 50 copies per mL was performed on a subset of specimens that were PRISM HBcore-reactive and were anti-HBs- negative or reactive at less than 100 IU per L. RESULTS: A total of 395 of 1231 specimens eligible by our serologic criteria were tested by PCR. Four anti-HBs-negative specimens were PCR-positive with estimated HBV DNA copy numbers of 10 per 30 copies per mL in two specimens and 50 to 100 copies per mL in two others. The HBV DNA detection rate in anti-HBs-negative specimens was 3.7 percent, and the projected rate among all Corzyme-reactive specimens was 0.24 percent, leading to an estimated yield of 1 HBV DNA-positive, anti-HBc-positive unit in 49,000 units that were otherwise eligible for transfusion (95% CI, 1 in 16,600-1 in 152,600). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-HBc screening detects HBsAg EIA-negative, HBV-infected donors at a rate comparable to the estimated residual risk for HBV window-period infections. The low viral load in the HBV DNA-positive samples suggests that minipool NAT will not detect most potentially infectious units from anti-HBc-positive donors.     

Transfusion-transmitted infectious diseases in Argentina, 1995 through 1997

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the safety of the blood supply, the quality of screening procedures, and the risk of transfusion transmission of infectious diseases in any country can be estimated by reviewing the records of blood donations and screening procedures and the prevalence of serologic markers of infectious diseases. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Information on blood donors, particularly the number of screened donors, and on the prevalence of serologic markers of infectious diseases was available from Argentina for 1995 through 1997. This information permitted the estimation of the risks and costs of preventing transfusion transmission of infectious diseases within the country during this period. RESULTS: Screening coverage was higher in the private sector. The proportion of donors screened for HIV increased from 84.52 percent in 1995 to 97.97 percent in 1997; in the same period, serologic screening for HbsAg increased from 83.71 percent to 98.48 percent; that for HCV from 69. 92 percent to 97.83 percent; and that for syphilis from 87.94 percent to 98.71 percent. One hundred percent of donors were screened for Trypanosoma cruzi throughout the period. The overall prevalence of HIV per year varied from 2.42 to 3.36 per 1,000 donors; that of HBV, from 5.80 to 9.76 per 1,000; of HCV, from 7.39 to 16.61 per 1,000; and of syphilis, from 5.25 to 7.65 per 1,000. The overall prevalence of antibodies to T. cruzi ranged from 36.53 to 49.20 per 1,000 donors. The overall index of the spread of infectious viral disease through blood transfusion decreased from 47. 74 per 10,000 donations in 1995 to 4.75 per 10,000 in 1997. The ratio of acquired infections to donations improved from 1:209 to 1:2, 102 during the same period. The risk of T. cruzi infection from 1995 through 1997 was, in theory, nil, given the 100-percent screening. The greatest threat to the quality of the blood supply throughout the period studied was HCV. CONCLUSION: The status of the blood supply in Argentina improved steadily from 1995 to 1997, as shown by the increase in screening coverage.     

Efficacy of various methods of confidential unit exclusion in identifying potentially infectious blood donations

To determine the efficacy of various methods of confidential unit exclusion (CUE) among donors at increased risk of HIV exposure, we surveyed AABB institutional members on their experience with 3 CUE methods: ballot or barcode, completed at the time of donation, and call-back, performed by the donor after leaving the donor center. From June 1985 to December 1987, 5,049,883 donations at 48 donor centers were evaluable for analysis. The results of this survey suggest that ballot and barcode methods of CUE are important adjuncts to other donor screening procedures in identifying potentially infectious units, and that both of these methods are superior to the call-back system of unit exclusion.     

Prevalence of serologic markers for hepatitis B and C viruses in Brazilian blood donors and incidence and residual risk of transfusion transmission of hepatitis C virus

BACKGROUND: We evaluate the current prevalence of serologic markers for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) in blood donors and estimated HCV incidence and residual transfusion‐transmitted risk at three large Brazilian blood centers. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data on whole blood and platelet donations were collected from January through December 2007, analyzed by center; donor type; age; sex; donation status; and serologic results for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti‐HBc), and anti‐HCV. HBV and HCV prevalence rates were calculated for all first‐time donations. HCV incidence was derived including interdonation intervals that preceded first repeat donations given during the study, and HCV residual risk was estimated for transfusions derived from repeat donors. RESULTS: There were 307,354 donations in 2007. Overall prevalence of concordant HBsAg and anti‐HBc reactivity was 289 per 100,000 donations and of anti‐HCV confirmed reactivity 191 per 100,000 donations. There were significant associations between older age and hepatitis markers, especially for HCV. HCV incidence was 3.11 (95% confidence interval, 0.77‐7.03) per 100,000 person‐years, and residual risk of HCV window‐phase infections was estimated at 5.0 per million units transfused. CONCLUSION: Improvement in donor selection, socioeconomic conditions, and preventive measures, implemented over time, may have helped to decrease prevalence of HBV and HCV, relative to previous reports. Incidence and residual risk of HCV are also diminishing. Ongoing monitoring of HBV and HCV markers among Brazilian blood donors should help guide improved recruitment procedures, donor selection, laboratory screening, and counseling strategies.     

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA screening of blood donations in minipools with the COBAS AmpliScreen HBV test

BACKGROUND: The risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmission by blood transfusion (estimated at 1 in 63,000-1 in 205,000 units in the United States) exceeds that of hepatitis C virus (HCV) or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Reduction of window-period HBV transmissions through detection of HBV DNA-positive units by minipool nucleic acid testing (MP NAT) would be expected to decrease this risk. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A large multicenter study of the COBAS AmpliScreen HBV test (Roche Molecular Systems) was conducted on minipools of 24 blood donation specimens. The yield of HBV DNA-positive, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative window-period donations was determined relative to current and newly licensed HBsAg assays. Donors with selected HBV DNA, HBsAg, and anti-hepatitis B core antigen (HBc) results were further evaluated. RESULTS: The detection rate of window-period units was 1 in 352,451 (95% confidence interval, 1 in 2,941,176-1 in 97,561). Assay specificity was high (99.9964%). HBV DNA was detected in 84 percent of HBsAg-positive, anti-HBc-positive donations by MP NAT and in 94 percent when individual-donation (ID) NAT was added. HBV DNA was detected in 0.03 percent of HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive donations by MP NAT and in 0.41 percent when ID NAT was added. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of HBV MP NAT will provide an increment in safety relative to HBV serologic screening, similar to that for HCV and in excess of that for HIV. Our data indicate that the implementation of HBV MP NAT would likely interdict 39 HBV window-period units and prevent 56 cases of transfusion-transmitted HBV infection annually. The current data indicate that HBV MP NAT should not lead to discontinuation of anti-HBc testing but that discontinuation of HBsAg testing with retention of anti-HBc testing may be possible.     

Predictive value of past and current screening tests for syphilis in blood donors: changing from a rapid plasma reagin test to an automated specific treponemal test for screening

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the change from a rapid plasma reagin (RPR) test to an automated specific treponemal test (PK-TP) in screening for syphilis in blood donors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional seroprevalence analysis was performed on 4,878,215 allogeneic blood donations from 19 American Red Cross Blood Services regions from May 1993 through September 1995. Positive predictive values relative to the confirmatory fluorescent treponemal antibody absorption test (FTA-ABS) were calculated. Differences in seroprevalence were compared in RPR and PK-TP tests for 1) unconfirmed and confirmed tests, 2) first-time and repeat donors, and 3) "recent" versus "past" infections. Donation data from three additional Red Cross regions were evaluated for repeat donation patterns of blood donors who had a donation that was positive in a serologic screening test for syphilis. The value of RPR and PK-TP tests as surrogate markers for HIV infection was compared. RESULTS: Reactive rates were lower but the positive predictive values was higher for the PK-TP test than for the RPR test. Initially, donors screened by PK-TP were more likely to be confirmed as positive than were donors screened by RPR, but these rates became comparable. It is estimated that a single HIV window-period donation was removed by serologic testing for syphilis each year of this study period. CONCLUSIONS: The change to the PK-TP test resulted in a lower repeatedly reactive rate, better prediction that a confirmed-positive test for syphilis would occur in testing in the FTA-ABS, fewer donations lost, and comparable deferral rates. Because of the high rate of reactivity to serologic testing for syphilis among donors previously confirmed positive for syphilis, indefinite deferral after a confirmed-positive index donation may be warranted. Serologic testing for syphilis is ineffective as a marker of HIV-infectious window-period donations.     

Infectious disease markers in young blood donors. Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study

BACKGROUND: To evaluate whether the active recruitment of young donors of high school and college age could affect the safety of the blood supply, prevalence and incidence rates of infectious disease markers among donors aged 17 to 18 and 19 to 22 were compared to those in donors 23 years of age and older. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Over 15 percent of 4.97 million whole blood donations were collected from donors aged 17 to 18 and 19 to 22. Prevalence (per 100,000 first-time donors) and incidence (per 100,000 person-years) rates for confirmed infectious diseases were compared between age groups. RESULTS: The prevalence estimates for HIV, HCV, HTLV-I and -II, and serologic tests for syphilis (STS) were significantly lower among first-time donors aged 17 to 18 and 19 to 22 than among those 23 to 44 years of age. HBsAg prevalence was higher in the first-time donors in the younger groups than in first-time donors in the older group because of higher prevalences among Asians and blacks. The incidence rates of HIV, HCV, and HTLV were similar in the younger groups and the older group. Donors 19 to 22 years of age had a higher incidence rate of estimated HBV than did donors aged 23 to 44 and 45+ (p<0.001), but the incidence rate of STS was lower in donors aged 17 to 18 and 19 to 22 than in donors 23 to 44 and 45+ years of age (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Aggressive recruitment of school-age donors should not result in an increased risk of transmission-transmitted infections, with the possible exception of HBV.     

Current value of serologic test for syphilis as a surrogate marker for blood-borne viral infections among blood donors in the United States

BACKGROUND: Serologic screening for syphilis has been justified in part as a surrogate marker for infections caused by other pathogens such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This study assessed the current surrogate value of the test.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Testing results for blood donors with the American Red Cross Blood Services between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2007, were analyzed. All donations were tested according to standard procedures for markers of HIV, hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV), syphilis, and other infections. The frequency of window-period (w-p) infections interdicted by syphilis testing was estimated.
RESULTS: There were significantly higher frequencies of HIV, HCV, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and HTLV confirmed-positive donations among those with positive syphilis test results, although the sensitivity of syphilis test positivity in these groups was low. Among more than 3 million repeat donors with complete testing through reactive donation confirmation for both syphilis and HIV (anti-HIV and HIV RNA), 225 seroconverted for syphilis but not for anti-HIV or HIV RNA and 83 converted for HIV (anti-HIV or HIV RNA) but not for syphilis, with only 1 who converted for both syphilis and HIV, resulting in an incidence ratio of 150 (95% confidence interval, 21-1080) and a sensitivity of 1.2 percent. No syphilis seroconverters converted for HCV, HBsAg, or anti-HTLV.
CONCLUSION: Syphilis testing presents no surrogate value for incident HCV, HBV, and HTLV infections and could only remove approximately 1 HIV w-p unit of every 148 million donations.     

The impact of simple donor education on donor behavioral deferral and infectious disease rates in São Paulo,Brazil

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) residual risk is higher in Brazilian than in US and European blood donors, probably due to failure to defer at‐risk individuals in Brazil. This study assessed the impact of an educational brochure in enhancing blood donors' knowledge about screening test window phase and reducing at‐risk individuals from donating. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This trial compared an educational intervention with a blood center's usual practice. The brochure was distributed in alternating months to all donors. After donating, sampled participants completed two questions about their HIV window period knowledge. The impact on HIV risk deferral, leaving without donation, confidential unit exclusion (CUE) use, and test positivity was also analyzed. RESULTS: From August to November 2007 we evaluated 33,940 donations in the main collection center of Fundação Pró‐Sangue/Hemocentro de São Paulo in São Paulo, Brazil. A significant (p < 0.001) pamphlet effect was found on correct responses to both questions assessing HIV window phase knowledge (68.1% vs. 52.9%) and transfusion risk (91.1% vs. 87.2%). After adjusting for sex and age, the pamphlet effect was strongest for people with more than 8 years of education. There was no significant pamphlet effect on HIV risk deferral rate, leaving without donation, use of CUE, or infectious disease rates. CONCLUSION: While the educational pamphlet increased window period knowledge, contrary to expectations this information alone was not enough to make donors self‐defer or acknowledge their behavioral risk.     

The introduction of anti-HTLV testing of blood donations and the risk of transfusion-transmitted HTLV, UK: 2002–2006

summary .  The objectives of the study were to describe the introduction of testing blood donations for antibodies to human T-cell lymphotropic virus (anti-HTLV) and to determine the risk of HTLV potentially infectious donations entering the UK blood supply. The rationale for testing was based on (i) evidence of transmission through transfusion in the UK, (ii) the serious nature of HTLV I-associated morbidity and (iii) evidence of infection in UK blood donors. From mid-2002, all blood donations made at UK blood centres were tested in pooled samples using Abbott-Murex HTLV I/II GE 80/81 enzyme immunoassay (EIA). Surveillance data were used to calculate the incidence and prevalence of anti-HTLV and derive estimates of risk. Between August 2002 and December 2006, 106 donations were confirmed positive for anti-HTLV (95 anti-HTLV I and 11 anti-HTLV II). Prevalence was 10-fold higher among donations from new donors than repeat (4·0 and 0·42 per 100 000 donations), and only one repeat donor had evidence of seroconversion. The risk of an HTLV I potentially infectious donation entering the UK blood supply was estimated at 0·11 per million donations (95% confidence interval 0·06 to 0·18). The current very low observed incidence and prevalence among blood donors reflect the very low estimated risk of an HTLV I-positive donation entering the UK blood supply. A change in either the epidemiology of HTLV in UK blood donors or the length of the window period of the test should prompt further review of the risk and a reassessment of anti-HTLV testing in the UK.     

Human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected blood donors: behavioral characteristics and reasons for donation. The HIV Blood Donor Study Group

Between May 1988 and September 1989, 829 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-seropositive donors were identified from 3,919,000 units of blood donated at 20 United States (US) blood centers. Of the 829,512 (62%) were interviewed to assess behavioral characteristics of the largest subgroup, men reporting sex with men, use of the confidential unit exclusion (CUE) and reasons for donation among all donors. Among 216 men reporting sex with men, 97 percent had male and 72 percent had female sexual contact since 1978. The majority identified themselves as bisexual (29%) or heterosexual (26%). Although 61 percent of 512 donors were aware of their risk behavior at donation, including 57 percent of those infected through heterosexual transmission, only 5 percent used the CUE. Reasons for donation included failure to read carefully (46%) or comprehend (15%) the deferral materials, pressure to donate (27%), a desire to be tested for HIV-1 (15%), and a reliance on screening to identify infected blood (10%). Reasons given for a perception of being at low risk included no recent risk behaviors, infrequent risk behaviors, or modification of risk behaviors. To reach high-risk donors, centers should assess whether referral materials provide necessary medical information and are clearly written for persons with diverse cultural and language backgrounds. Staff should be encouraged to avoid the use of culturally stigmatized terms and behaviors that may be perceived as high pressure.     

Current incidence and estimated residual risk of transfusion-transmitted infections in donations made to Canadian Blood Services

BACKGROUND: New testing methods such as nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT) and chemiluminescent serologic assays have been introduced, more precise estimates for infectious window periods are available, and a new method for estimating the residual risk (RR) of transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs) has been developed. Thus, available RR estimates for Canada need to be updated. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Incidence rates for known TTI markers were determined for all allogeneic whole-blood donations made to Canadian Blood Services between 2001 and 2005; they were derived from NAT conversions or seroconversions of repeat donors with at least two donations in a 3-year period. RR estimates for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 and hepatitis C virus (HCV) derived from the classical incidence/window-period model were compared to those obtained by the new method that estimates incidence from NAT-positive, antibody-negative donations (NAT-yield cases) from all donors divided by person-years. RESULTS: With the classical method, the RR of HIV (1 per 7.8 million donations) and HCV (1 per 2.3 million) were low; HBV RR was higher (1 per 153,000). HCV RR was significantly lower when estimated with the new method (1 per 13 million). Eleven HCV NAT-yield cases were predicted by applying the classical method to our seroconversion data but only 2 were observed (p = 0.011). Observed HIV-1 NAT-yield cases (n = 1) matched those predicted (n = 0.7). CONCLUSION: New tests have reduced an already low risk of TTI in Canada. HCV RR estimates by two different methods differed but both were low.     

Prevalence of transfusion-transmissible viral infections in first-time US blood donors by donation site

BACKGROUND: Understanding the donor base, infectious disease prevalence, and donation loss at various blood donation sites will help maximize blood collection efforts and blood availability. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using donation data collected at five US blood centers, the prevalence of HIV, HTLV, HBsAg, and HCV in first-time whole-blood donations at 10 donation sites was evaluated: military, education, religious, professional, industry, services, community, health care, government, and fixed sites. Donation loss from screening test reactivity at each donation site was also evaluated. RESULTS: During the study, 1.2 million first-time whole-blood donations were collected. Military and education sites had a low prevalence of all viral markers, except for HBsAg, which was highest at education sites. Variations in viral marker prevalence among donation sites were partially explained by donor demographic differences. Donation loss varied by donation site, ranging from 3.3 percent at education sites to 6.4 percent at industry sites, indicating differential efficiency of blood collection efforts. CONCLUSION: Different rates of positive viral test results and donation loss in first-time whole-blood donors were observed at various types of donation sites. This information may be useful in estimating the yield of usable units from specific blood drives and in allocating resources to meet blood center collection goals.     

Impact of changes in viral marker screening assays

BACKGROUND: Monitoring the performance of routinely used infectious disease serologic tests is necessary to evaluate their effectiveness in identifying true-positive units and erroneously disqualifying safe blood donors. METHODS: With two large screening test data sets collected between 1991 and 1998 and between 1997 and 2000, the impact of changes in screening assays for HIV, HCV, and HBsAg was analyzed with regard to the prevalence of confirmed-positive, indeterminate, and confirmed-negative results and the deferral of donors with an indeterminate or negative results (donor loss). RESULTS: The prevalence of indeterminate results and donors loss increased significantly in the 6 months after introduction of an HIV-1/2 EIA. A second-generation HCV EIA increased the detection of confirmed-positive donations in repeat donors (p < 0.001) and increased the prevalence of indeterminate donations. Implementation of a third-generation HCV EIA resulted in a significant decrease in indeterminate results in first-time donors. Nonspecific test results increased when HBsAg test kits from a different manufacturer were introduced or different lots of HIV antibody screening test kits from the same manufacturer were used. CONCLUSION: Introduction of newly licensed versions of assays, switching kit manufacturers, and lot-to-lot variations have an impact on rates of deferrals of safe donors as well as sensitivity of routine screening. Before considering changes in screening tests, blood centers should be aware of, and evaluate, the potential impact on donor loss.