Retention of "safe" blood donors. The Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study

BACKGROUND: There are obvious advantages to increasing donor retention. However, for reasons of blood safety, certain donors may, in fact, be more desirable to retain than others. “Safe” donors are defined as those who provided a blood donation that was negative on all laboratory screening tests and who subsequently reported no behavioral risks in response to an anonymous survey. This study identifies the most important factors affecting the intention of “safe” donors to provide another donation. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: An anonymous survey asking about donation history, sexual history, injecting drug use, and recent donation experience was mailed to 50,162 randomly selected allogeneic donors (including directed donors) who gave blood from April through July or from October through December 1993 at one of the five United States blood centers participating in the Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study. Before mailing, questionnaires were coded to designate donors with nonreactive laboratory screening tests at their most recent donation. RESULTS: A total of 34,726 donors (69%) responded, with substantially higher response among repeat donors. According to reported intentions only, the vast majority of “safe” donors indicated a high likelihood of donating again within the next 12 months. Only 3.4 percent reported a low likelihood of donating again. A comparison of those likely to return and those unlikely to return reveals significant differences in demographics and in ratings of the donation experience. A higher proportion of those unlikely to return were first-time donors, minority-group donors, and donors with less education. The highest projected loss among “safe” donors was seen for those who gave a fair to poor assessment of their treatment by blood center staff or of their physical well-being during or after donating. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that efforts to improve donors' perceptions of their donation experience, as well as attention to the physical effects of blood donation, may aid in the retention of both repeat and first-time donors.     

Rupture of the posterior tibial tendon: CT and surgical findings

Computed tomography (CT) was performed in 42 patients with 49 clinically suspected tears of the posterior tibial tendon. Twenty-eight of the 49 suspected tears were subsequently surgically explored and repaired. Three patterns of tendon abnormalities were recognized on CT scans: type I-intact, hypertrophied, heterogeneous tendon; type II-attenuated tendon; and type III-absence of a portion of a tendon. Types I and II correlated with partial rupture seen during surgery, and type III correlated with complete rupture of the tendon. CT findings were accurate in 96% of the patients who underwent surgery. In four cases (14%), tendon rupture was seen on CT scans, but the extent of the injury was underestimated and the rupture was misclassified. Reactive periostitis of the distal tibia was seen in 71% of diseased tendons and may represent an important factor in the diagnosis of tendon rupture.     

Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS): Process, format, and clinimetric testing plan.

This article presents the revision process, major innovations, and clinimetric testing program for the Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), known as the MDS-UPDRS. The UPDRS is the most widely used scale for the clinical study of Parkinson's disease (PD). The MDS previously organized a critique of the UPDRS, which cited many strengths, but recommended revision of the scale to accommodate new advances and to resolve problematic areas. An MDS-UPDRS committee prepared the revision using the recommendations of the published critique of the scale. Subcommittees developed new material that was reviewed by the entire committee. A 1-day face-to-face committee meeting was organized to resolve areas of debate and to arrive at a working draft ready for clinimetric testing. The MDS-UPDRS retains the UPDRS structure of four parts with a total summed score, but the parts have been modified to provide a section that integrates nonmotor elements of PD: I, Nonmotor Experiences of Daily Living; II, Motor Experiences of Daily Living; III, Motor Examination; and IV, Motor Complications. All items have five response options with uniform anchors of 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. Several questions in Part I and all of Part II are written as a patient/caregiver questionnaire, so that the total rater time should remain approximately 30 minutes. Detailed instructions for testing and data acquisition accompany the MDS-UPDRS in order to increase uniform usage. Multiple language editions are planned. A three-part clinimetric program will provide testing of reliability, validity, and responsiveness to interventions. Although the MDS-UPDRS will not be published until it has successfully passed clinimetric testing, explanation of the process, key changes, and clinimetric programs allow clinicians and researchers to understand and participate in the revision process.     

Efficacy of a patient-training videotape on motor fluctuations for on-off diaries in parkinson's disease

Patient on-off diaries are used in clinical trials, but a method to assure agreement between patient and examiner has never been developed. We tested whether a patient-teaching tape increased the rate of agreement between patient diary ratings and simultaneous neurologic assessment by a trained professional. A total of 32 consecutive patients who had Parkinson's disease with motor fluctuations independently completed a 4-h on-off diary (nine ratings) at the same time as an examiner. Those with <80% agreement with the examiner (n = 20) were randomized to view either a training tape that showed motor fluctuations (experimental group) or another videotape of general patient educational material (control group). All patients then underwent the same 4-h assessment of motor fluctuations. To test for long-term retention, they returned 1 month later and, without reviewing the videotape, underwent a final 4-h correlation assessment. After the training tape, the experimental group showed significant improvement, whereas the control group showed no improvement. Furthermore, another month later, the improvement in the experimental group was retained. Based on these findings, we suggest that future clinical trials assessing motor fluctuations incorporate this tape into their basic methodology.