Genetic research in the blood bank: acceptability to Northern California donors

BACKGROUND: Blood banks have large altruistic donor populations and existing infrastructure that make them attractive sites for genetic epidemiologic research, but donors' willingness to participate and the impact on blood donation are unknown. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 2162 blood donors in Northern California responded to a cross‐sectional questionnaire in August and September 2007. Participants were asked their likelihood of participation and future blood donation under three different scenarios: identity‐linked genetic research, identity‐unlinked genetic research, and genetic testing as a service. RESULTS: The majority of blood donors indicated that they would be likely or very likely to participate in identity‐linked genetic research (67%) and in identity‐unlinked genetic research (54%). While older donors and more frequent donors were more likely to participate in identity‐linked research, younger, Caucasian, more educated, and more frequent donors were more likely to participate in identity‐unlinked research. Less than 10% of donors indicated they would be less likely to donate blood in the future if genetic research was conducted at blood banks. More than 75% of donors would be interested in genetic testing as an optional service at the blood bank, but more than 20% of donors would be less likely to donate if such a service was offered. CONCLUSION: Overall, we found that the majority of blood donors would be likely to participate in genetic research and that less than 10% would be less inclined to donate if such research was conducted by blood banks.     

Blood donors and factors impacting the blood donation decision

The aging of the US population and the evidence that only about 5% of individuals in the United States donate blood each year raise concerns about the assurance of an adequate, safe supply of blood in the future. Blood donation decision making has been investigated worldwide for decades to understand the process better to increase donation efficiency, safety, retention, collection numbers, and diversity of the donor pool. This review focuses on the characteristics of allogeneic blood donors, the motivational sources in donor decision making, and the research concepts and techniques used to examine these factors. Some historic studies considered pivotal, as well as more recent surveys, may not be pertinent to or representative of the current national donor pool. Interpretation of data related to donor characteristics should examine whether demographics mirror the donor pool to assist in targeted recruitment or if targeted recruitment actually leads to the reported demographics. Few recent studies of donor motivation have been published. Modern sources of positive and negative motivation are worth exploring through scientifically sound investigations involving representative cohorts using multifactorial approaches. Strategies that focus on retaining return donors and transforming first-time donors into repeaters would be beneficial. Investigations are needed also to assess research questions and to develop well-designed interventions to test hypotheses and to produce generalizable findings applicable to future donor decision making.     

Factors that motivate and hinder blood donation in Greece

Donations in Greece are insufficient to cover the high transfusion needs arising from large numbers of thalassaemia and sickle cell anaemia patients and the implementation of new surgical techniques. Efforts to achieve self-sufficiency, and to render blood supplies safer and manageable must focus on recruiting and retaining more volunteer donors and on converting the large pool of replacement donors. The aim of the study was to gain insight into public perception regarding the risks of donation and transfusion and to identify the factors that would motivate more people in Greece to regularly donate blood. Questionnaires were distributed to 1,600 donors at the blood bank and visitors to hospitals at 11 locations across the country. Data on demographics, donation behaviour, incentives, risk perception and attitudes towards donation and transfusion were analysed separately for volunteer and replacement donors and non-donors. The results showed that women and young people donate the least in Greece. Also, many donors do not donate because they are not reminded to. A small percentage of donors confessed to having concealed part of the truth to background questions. Overall, incentives to donate were considered important and included future availability of blood for self or family, paid leave from work and free blood tests. Recruitment and retention efforts should include better communication with current donors, and raising awareness among eligible donors. Staff should be educated in soliciting information from potential donors, and incentives should be better aligned to avoid conflict with ethical values and ensure honesty in the prescreening process.     

Assessment of motivations for return donation among deferred blood donors. American Red Cross ARCNET Study Group

BACKGROUND: The recent addition of a computerized donor deferral registry to American Red Cross blood donation procedures has enabled blood center staffs to identify, before donation, persons who attempt to donate despite previous deferral. The current study investigated reasons that deferred donors return to donate, despite having been notified that they are ineligible. STUDY DESIGN AND METHOD: Anonymous mail surveys requesting demographic information, details of last donation or attempted donation, and assessments of incentives for donating were sent to 311 donors presenting inappropriately at blood drives and 849 matched controls in three American Red Cross regions between April and July 1996. RESULTS: Responses were received from a total of 113 deferred donors and 388 matched controls. Analysis of the 49 permanently deferred donors indicated that they were more likely than controls to donate blood to receive test results or to be awarded community service credit. Responses also revealed that some deferred donors may return to donate blood because of a misunderstanding of the deferral message or erroneous recruitment by blood center staff. CONCLUSION: There is a need before donation for the provision of educational materials regarding the window period of infection and for careful consideration of the use of incentives to attract donors to blood centers. It is also important to provide to donors a clear and consistent message regarding their test results and deferral status.     

Social support attenuates presyncopal reactions to blood donation

BACKGROUND: The experience of unpleasant blood donation reactions (e.g., dizziness, nausea, and fainting) has been linked to negative attitudes about donation and decreased likelihood of repeat donation. Consequently, interventions to reduce the adverse effects of blood donation are important and likely to increase donor retention. Based on laboratory studies suggesting that social support attenuates both physical and psychological responses to stress, the present study hypothesized that the presence of a supportive person during the donation process may help reduce reactions.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A final sample of 65 men and women with fewer than three prior donations was randomly assigned to either donate blood as usual or donate with a supportive research assistant. Donors in the support condition were accompanied throughout the donation process by a female research assistant who provided encouragement, made reassuring remarks, and engaged in small talk. Donors in both conditions completed a series of questions to assess anxiety, experience of prefaint reactions, and willingness to provide a future donation.
RESULTS: Compared to standard donation controls, donors in the social support condition reported fewer prefaint reactions (F(1,61) = 9.15, p = 0.004, η²= 0.13) and greater likelihood of donating again within the next year (Z =−1.70, p < 0.05, one-tailed).
CONCLUSION: Relatively novice donors report reduced reactions to blood donation when accompanied by a supportive individual, suggesting that social support may be a simple strategy to enhance the donation experience and possibly increase donor retention.     

Mild reactions to blood donation predict a decreased likelihood of donor return.

A growing body of evidence suggests that episodes of fainting can deter volunteer blood donors from returning to donate in the future. In contrast, relatively little is known about the effect of significantly more common mild reactions (e.g., faintness, dizziness, lightheadedness) on donor retention. In the present study, 1052 volunteer blood donors completed a standardized measure of subjective physiological reactions immediately after blood donation (Blood Donation Reactions Inventory), and individual scores were used to predict repeat donation behavior during a one-year follow-up. Results of a logistic regression analysis indicated that higher scores on the Blood Donation Reactions Inventory were associated with a significantly lower likelihood of repeat donation, and that novice donors who scored highest on the scale were less than half as likely to have returned to donate in the following year. These findings suggest that the Blood Donation Reactions Inventory is an effective method of assessing reactions that predict donor non-return, and therefore may be a useful addition to future studies aimed at enhancing donor satisfaction and retention.     

A questionnaire: will plateletpheresis donors accept multicomponent donation?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: New technological developments make it possible to collect red blood cells (RBC) by apheresis which provides standardised products and has the potential for improved RBC quality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the donors' opinion about the multicomponent donation procedure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For evaluating the donors' opinion about this new apheresis technique we compiled a questionnaire. The questionnaire was given to all single needle actual plateletpheresis donors (n = 133) that donated platelets in our Institute during February-March 2001. The questionnaire contained 12 questions related to: (1) general information about previous donations of our donors and (2) donors' opinion about multicomponent donation. After implementation of multicomponent donation in December 2001 the data of the questionnaire were compared with the actual opinions of the donors about the procedure. RESULTS: The mean age of the donors was 38.1 +/- 9.1 years. The median number of previous platelets donations of the interviewed donors was 30. The majority of donors (92.4%) were willing for multicomponent donation. In the same time the majority of donors (74.8%) were willing to donate multicomponents four times per year. The different donation time was not an argument for the donors for the multicomponent donation, while the reduction of incidence of transfusion transmitted diseases was a motivation for them. The decrease of hemoglobin and the side effects caused by possible iron-supplementation therapy were found acceptable from most of our donors. Approximately 74% of the donors thought that the donation of a second component should result in better remuneration whereas 20% of them believed that the remuneration should be unchanged. Seventy-five RBC units were concurrently collected with platelets since December 15th, 2001. Six donors (7.4%) were unwilling to donate an additional RBC unit. CONCLUSION: Acceptance and disacceptance rates were almost equal after the implementation of multicomponent donation and at the time point when the interview was performed. The majority of donors was highly motivated to donate multicomponents, by these means we were able to increase our RBC supply and to improve standardization of our products.     

Comparison of demographic and donation profiles and transfusion-transmissible disease markers and risk rates in previously transfused and nontransfused blood donors

BACKGROUND: Increasing concern about transfusion transmission of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease has resulted in indefinite deferral of transfused donors in France and the UK. Little is known, however, about the impact of indefinite deferral of transfused donors on blood safety and availability in the US. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were collected on allogeneic donations at five US blood centers during 1991 through 2000. Donation characteristics, prevalence, and incidence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) were compared between transfused and nontransfused donors. Unreported deferrable risk (UDR) and reasons to donate were evaluated with data from a mail survey. RESULTS: Transfusion history was reported by 4.2 percent of donors. Prevalence and incidence of HIV and HBV were comparable between transfused and nontransfused donors. Although HCV incidence was similar in both groups, HCV prevalence was nearly three times higher in transfused than in nontransfused first-time donors. UDR and reasons to donate were similar in the two groups, except transfused donors were less likely to donate for screening test results (odds ratio, 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-0.8). CONCLUSION: Transfused and nontransfused donors had similar viral incidence and comparable UDR, suggesting that indefinite deferral of transfused donors would unlikely improve blood safety. Until more is known about the prevalence and transfusion transmissibility of emerging agents, indefinite deferral of previously transfused donors in the US does not appear warranted.     

Phlebotomy, blood donation, and hereditary hemochromatosis

Permitting the use of blood from HH patients without a disease-state labeling has been a controversial topic. Another issue has been the safety of HH blood. If otherwise qualified to be a blood donor in the US, HH patients will be allowed to make contributions to the blood supply if they donate at a collection facility that has been granted an exemption to their FDA license. The amount of additional blood made available by using HH patient/donors is uncertain. Gathering data from HH patients/donors regarding management, safety, and augmentation of supply is essential in assessing the success of recent changes.     

Awareness of blood group and blood donation among medical students

Background

Transfusion of blood-derived products is often used as a life-saving treatment, and being a blood donor should be common, especially among medical professionals. Thus, an awareness of one’s own blood type in medical students should be common. Our aim was to assess if students of the Medical University of Warsaw know their blood type and how many of them are registered blood donors.

影响公民自愿无偿献血的因素调查分析

目的了解影响公民无偿献血的各种因素以及公民决定献血的重点因素,以制定有针对性的招募策略。方法依照知、信、行(KAP)理论设计调查表,对成都市2385名献血与未献血的公民做现场问卷调查,通过对其无偿献血的知识、态度、行为的研究来做相关分析。结果①对无偿献血的认知:成都地区公民对我国实行无偿献血制度的知晓率较高(87.5%),但对无偿献血常识和危险行为方式总的知晓率较低(分别为29.4%、32.5%),其中献血者(1349名)对无偿献血常识和危险行为方式总的知晓率(分别为33.4%、38.1%)均高于未献血者(1036名)(分别为24.2%、25.1%)(P<0.05);文化程度越低,对献血常识和危险行为的知晓率越低,职业分布以医生的知晓率最高,农民的最低。②了解渠道:献血者通过人际传播的渠道了解的比例高于未献血者(P<0.05)。③献血动机:未献血者、初次献血者和重复献血者愿意献血的主要原因是“献爱心”,但献血动机比较多样,街头献血的行为受各种环境因素的影响;“人道主义”、“同伴招募”和“健康检查”是促使公民初次献血的因素,而影响初次献血的重点因素是“便利和勇气”;再次献血的公民主要是“献爱心、没什么特别原因和享受用血优惠”。④关注信息:未献血者如果打算献血,最希望了解的依次为“献血后是否影响身体”、“是否会感染疾病”、“血液相关知识”、“相关疾病知识”、“献血后优惠”、“献血时间地点”和“其他“。⑤对待献血的态度和行为:认为献血不影响身体的公民占73.5%,献血者(76.3%)的比例高于未献血者(70%)(P<0.05);献血者愿意继续献血的占93.3%,重复献血者(97.1%)高于初次献血者(91.1%)(P<0.05);77.3%的献血者表示“如有危险行为时选择放弃献血”。结论动机、认知、态度、个性及职业与文化程度等自身因素,献血法律法规、献血宣传方式、献血服务过程等环境因素亦都会影响公民献血。献血者招募的策略,首先应研究不同人群对献血不同的需求,采取针对性的措施,促使公民献血;其次,应为献血者提供安全、舒适和方便的服务。     

Donor selection--securing a safe blood supply.

A survey of blood donors conducted at the Red Cross Blood Bank, Melbourne, Victoria in May 1989 identified deficits in the knowledge of some donor groups. As a result a new medical form for potential donors was designed and trialled. While there were few differences in responses to questions relating to interviewing, general health, medication or transfusion therapy, responses to questions regarding the eligibility of AIDS/high risk groups to donate showed several statistically significant differences. Although improvements in donor awareness have been demonstrated in some areas, further action is necessary to ensure that effective donor selection contributes to quality control and safety of transfusion products.     

Motivations to donate blood: demographic comparisons

BACKGROUND: Understanding blood donor motivations is crucial to improving effectiveness of donor recruitment and retention programs. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from a 1998 survey of 92,581 U.S. blood donors were used to evaluate factors influencing the decision to donate in various demographic groups. Data were weighted to adjust for response and sample design. RESULTS: Of 52,650 respondents, 45,588 gave whole-blood (WB) donations. Among all demographic groups, the major reasons to donate were altruism (75-87%) and awareness of the need for blood (34-43%). Except for first-time donors and those 相似文献   

Attitudes toward blood donation incentives in the United States: implications for donor recruitment

BACKGROUND: The potential effectiveness of various donation incentive programs may vary by demographics, first-time or repeat status, and collection site. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Attitudes toward future incentives were obtained from a 1998 anonymous survey sent to 92,581 US blood donors. Responses (encouraged, discouraged, no difference) to incentives were compared within demographic groups, donations sites, and between first-time and repeat community whole-blood (WB) donors using chi-square tests and logistic regressions adjusted for sample design. RESULTS: Incentives most likely to encourage donation return among all 45,588 WB respondents were blood credits (61%), cholesterol screening (61%), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening (73% of men). Younger donors (< or = 25 years old) were 4 to 5 times more likely to be encouraged to donate if offered compensatory incentives (tickets to events, discounts or lottery and/or raffle tickets), gifts, or a token of appreciation than were those donors older than 55. This age effect influenced positive attitudes toward incentives in first-time donors and in donors giving at schools, universities, or military sites. Among all donors, up to 7 to 9 percent reported they would be discouraged to return if offered compensatory incentives. CONCLUSIONS: Blood credits and cholesterol and PSA screening would be well received at all donation sites. Gifts, compensatory incentives, and tokens of appreciation appeal more to younger donors. These data may allow blood centers to optimize recruitment by tailoring limited incentive resources more effectively.     

Motivators and barriers to blood donation in African American college students

Background

An adequate blood supply depends on volunteer non-remunerated blood donors. African Americans have lower blood donation rates than whites. To improve African American blood donation rates, the motivators and barriers to African Americans must be explored. This study investigated the differences in motivators and barriers to blood donation between donor and non-donor African American college students.

Methods

African Americans college students at two Historically Black Colleges and Universities completed a 41-item, self-administered questionnaire, which assessed participant’s donation frequency, motivators and barriers toward donation, and knowledge and beliefs towards blood donation.

Results

Three hundred and sixty four primarily female college students (96% African Americans, 93% female) completed the questionnaire. Forty-nine percent reported prior blood donation experience (donors) and 51% were non-donors. The primary motivator for donors and non-donors was convenience (89% donor, 82% non-donor). Donors were more likely than non-donors to disagree with statements regarding blood donation as being too painful (82% donor, 44% non-donor), resulting in feeling faint, dizzy, or nauseated (61% donor, 29% non-donor). Donors more often agreed that the blood supply is safe (77% donor, 58% non-donor), less often concerned about receiving a transfusion (61% donor, 73% non-donor), and more often aware of local blood shortages (50% donor, 35% non-donor).

Conclusions

African Americans female college students are willing to donate blood given convenience and support from their university. Educational campaigns to increase knowledge regarding the safety of the blood donation process and the ongoing needs of an adequate blood supply might be effective methods to increase blood donation.     

Predicting donation among an Irish sample of donors and nondonors: extending the theory of planned behavior

BACKGROUND: Research has indicated the ability of the Theory of Planned Behavior to predict blood donation. This study tested an extended version of the Theory of Planned Behavior (attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control with the addition of past behavior, moral norm, self-identity, and anticipated regret) in predicting donation intention and behavior among donors and nondonors and if forming implementation intentions improved attendance at a mobile blood donation clinic. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This study used a cross-sectional follow-up design. A questionnaire was distributed to 600 staff and students at the National University of Ireland, Galway, before the arrival of a mobile clinic to Galway city. Half of these participants were invited to make implementation intentions specifying how, where, and when they planned to donate blood. A second questionnaire measuring reported attendance at the clinic was distributed 2 weeks after the first questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 172 eligible donors returned questionnaires (29% response rate). The extended Theory of Planned Behavior accounted for 51 percent of the variance in intention to donate in the future: anticipated regret, attitude, perceived behavioral control, self-identity, and subjective norm significantly predicted intention. Donors differed from nondonors: they possessed more favorable attitudes toward blood donation, had a greater sense of donor identity, and believed more strongly in a moral obligation to donate blood than nondonors. Those who made implementation intentions were no more likely to donate that those who had not. CONCLUSION: Owing to the different factors influencing the donation decision for donors and nondonors, separate strategies to promote donation should be designed for these subgroups, targeting the elements most pertinent to each group.     

Human immunodeficiency virus test‐seeking blood donors in a large blood bank in São Paulo,Brazil

BACKGROUND: Persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) risk behaviors are excluded from donation to reduce the risk of transfusion‐transmitted infection. Persons donating to be tested for HIV may therefore deny risk behaviors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A random sample of donors completed a survey on motivations, knowledge, and attitudes on the screening process. Donors were considered test seekers if they agreed with two statements “I think that blood donation is a good, fast, and anonymous way to get my blood tested” and “I donate to get my test results.” This study was conducted from June to November 2006 at the largest blood bank in São Paulo, Brazil. RESULTS: Of 3061 participants, 208 (7%) were test seekers. They tended to be male and had a lower educational level. They were more likely to have incorrect knowledge about blood safety (e.g., not knowing that a unit can test antibody negative and still transmit infection, 50% vs. 42%, p = 0.02), express dissatisfaction with screening questions (e.g., feeling that important questions were not asked, 14% vs. 5%, p < 0.01), and concur that donors do not answer questions truthfully (e.g., donors have more sexual partners than they admit, 29% vs. 18%, p < 0.01). Test seekers were more likely to believe that it is acceptable to donate blood to get tested for HIV (41% vs. 10%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Test‐seeking motivation, coupled with low knowledge of window period risk, is counter to improving blood safety and to donor prevention needs. Donor education needs to be improved along with availability of appropriate HIV counseling and testing.     

Seroprevalence of SARS-Coronavirus 2 among asymptomatic healthy blood donors from healthcare and non-healthcare settings: Implications for safety of blood donors and blood collection staff during blood donation

IntroductionSARS-Coronavirus-2 pandemic has adversely affected blood supply as potential blood donors were afraid of acquiring infection in hospital settings. We aimed to compare COVID-19 seroprevalence among asymptomatic blood donors from healthcare and non-healthcare setting to analyse the difference in exposure level of each group as well as the risk of acquiring infection during the process of blood donation.Material and MethodsAnalysis of whole blood donors tested for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies was carried out after categorizing them into healthcare workers (HCW) and non-healthcare workers (NHCW). NHCW were further categorized into residents of containment and non-containment zones and seroprevalence analyzed. Seroprevalence among different ABO blood groups was also analyzed.Results1191 blood donors were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with 9.5 % seropositivity. Significantly lower seropositivity of 3.2 % (p < 0.001) was observed among HCW as compared to 10.9 % seropositivity in NHCW. Among NHCW no difference in seropositivity was observed based on residence in containment or non-containment zone. Significantly higher (p = 0.012) seroprevalence was observed among A blood group donors (12.5 %) as compared to O blood group donors (6.8 %).ConclusionResults suggests that a blood donor, in a hospital setting is less likely to be exposed to COVID-19 disease than when participating in activities of daily living. It is postulated that the lower seroprevalence among HCW as compared to NHCW reflects differences in knowledge and practice of preventive measures among these groups. The findings should instil confidence among blood donors and motivate them to donate blood without fear.     

AIDS knowledge and beliefs related to blood donation in US adults: results from a national telephone survey

BACKGROUND: Misperceptions about the risk of contracting AIDS from donating blood may be preventing people from donating, while incorrect beliefs about AIDS screening tests or the appropriateness of donating with risk factors may place the blood supply at increased risk. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Questions about AIDS transmission and testing and the acceptability of test seeking and donating with risk factors were asked in the National Community Health Survey, a telephone survey of 9859 US adults. Results were weighted to represent the US population. Demographic and donor status (current, lapsed, never) differences in knowledge and attitudes were examined using chi‐square and logistic regression. RESULTS: Nearly 25% of respondents thought it was somewhat or very likely that they could get AIDS from donating blood. Almost 80% knew that all blood donations are tested for AIDS, but only 65.5% knew about the test window period. A total of 33.5% felt that it was acceptable to use the blood center for AIDS testing, while 9.1% believed that it was okay for someone to donate even if they had AIDS risk behaviors; all had significant demographic and donor status differences. CONCLUSIONS: While there are many factors that prevent people from giving blood, the incorrect belief that it is possible to contract AIDS from donating is likely a barrier to donation. If blood centers dispelled this myth among those who have never donated, especially among minorities, it could be important for recruitment. In addition, our findings indicate that changes to education or recruitment could be needed to discourage test seeking and donations from risky donors.     

Increasing blood availability by changing donation patterns

BACKGROUND: There is a declining margin between US blood collections and transfusions. Donation patterns were examined to characterize returning first-time donors and predict the impact on blood availability of decreasing the number of nonreturning donors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: First-time donors giving between 1991 and 1994 were followed for 3 to 6 years. The impact of decreasing the number of nonreturning donors in a 12-month period was projected using the Poisson distribution to model the donation patterns of 539,063 donors who gave in 1995. Repeat donors were classified as "returning first-time" (gave a first-time donation within 12 months of their index donation), "established" (gave a repeat donation), and "inactive" (didn't donate in the 12 months before their index donation). RESULTS: A total of 49 percent of first-time donors did not return within 6 years. Returning first-time donors tended to be US born, white, and had more than a high school education. In 1995, 30 percent of donors were first time, 31 percent were established, 7 percent were returning first time, and 32 percent were inactive, giving 1.5, 2.4, 1.9, and 1.7 donations in 12 months, respectively. Reducing nonreturning donors by 5 percent could increase blood collections by 2.7 percent. Similarly, 15 or 25 percent reductions in nonreturns could increase collections by 8.6 or 16.0 percent, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most donors are not giving near the donation limit. A substantial increase in donations could be achieved by a relatively small decrease in donor nonreturn. Research is needed to understand why approximately half of first-time donors donate only once.