Subjective donor deferral as a tool for increased blood transfusion safety: A cross-sectional observational study.

Autor: de Moura JG; Department of Hematology Center of Hematology and Hemotherapy of Ceará (HEMOCE) Fortaleza Brazil., Costa BA; Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Mount Sinai Morningside and Mount Sinai West New York New York USA., Silva FAC; Department of Hematology Center of Hematology and Hemotherapy of Ceará (HEMOCE) Fortaleza Brazil., Fechine FV; Clinical Pharmacology Unit, Drug Research and Development Center (NPDM) Federal University of Ceará (UFC) Fortaleza Brazil., Macedo ÊS; Walter Cantidio Teaching Hospital (HUWC) Federal University of Ceará (UFC) Fortaleza Brazil., Barbosa JLJ; Department of Hematology Center of Hematology and Hemotherapy of Ceará (HEMOCE) Fortaleza Brazil., Santos FJC; Department of Hematology Center of Hematology and Hemotherapy of Ceará (HEMOCE) Fortaleza Brazil., de Francesco Daher E; Walter Cantidio Teaching Hospital (HUWC) Federal University of Ceará (UFC) Fortaleza Brazil., de Barros Carlos LM; Department of Hematology Center of Hematology and Hemotherapy of Ceará (HEMOCE) Fortaleza Brazil., Brunetta DM; Department of Hematology Center of Hematology and Hemotherapy of Ceará (HEMOCE) Fortaleza Brazil.; Walter Cantidio Teaching Hospital (HUWC) Federal University of Ceará (UFC) Fortaleza Brazil.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Health science reports [Health Sci Rep] 2021 Oct 14; Vol. 4 (4), pp. e424. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Oct 14 (Print Publication: 2021).
DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.424
Abstrakt: Objectives: This study aims at evaluating whether subjective donor deferral (SDD) has the potential for increasing blood transfusion safety.
Background: Appropriate donor selection via clinical and serologic screening is necessary to prevent transfusion-transmissible infections (TTIs). One additional strategy adopted by some Brazilian blood transfusion centers (BTCs) is the rejection of a donation by the pre-donation interviewer based on subjective factors.
Methods/materials: We conducted a STROBE-guided cross-sectional study including 105 005 prospective donors who presented to our BTC between 1 January 2013, and 31 December 2015. Donors were evaluated for age, gender, education level, donation type and history, confidential unit exclusion, SDD, and results of serologic screening for TTIs.
Results: Even after controlling for potential confounding variables, subjectively deferred donors were more likely to have at least one reactive serology in the standard screening (OR: 2.80; 95% CI: 2.13-3.69; P  < .001). They also had a higher risk for testing positive for syphilis (OR: 4.47; 95% CI: 3.05-6.55; P  < .001), hepatitis B (OR: 5.69; 95% CI: 2.48-13.08; P  < .001), and HIV (OR: 6.14; 95% CI: 3.22-11.69; P  < .001).
Conclusions: Routine implementation of SDD in donor selection may be an effective additional measure to avoid TTIs, highlighting the importance of interviewer experience, perspicacity, and face-to-face contact with donors for blood safety assurance.
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicting interests.
(© 2021 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: