Literature DB >> 17725722

The donor health assessment questionnaire: potential for format change and computer-assisted self-interviews to improve donor attention.

Mindy Goldman1, Shefali S Ram, Qi-Long Yi, John Mazerall, Sheila F O'brien.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Canadian donor health assessment questionnaire (DHAQ) has developed gradually over many years. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the format and method of administration of the DHAQ influences donor attentiveness. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Between May 2004 and September 2005, a total of 1,397 donors participated in the study by completing the DHAQ by one of three methods: the current Canadian Blood Services (CBS) format and method of administration, which is partly self-administered and partly interviewer-administered (Method 1); the DHAQ reformatted to the AABB Uniform Donor Health Questionnaire format and self-administered (Method 2); and an audiovisual computer-assisted self-interview (CASI; Method 3). This was followed by a short, scripted interview assessing recall of 17 specific items queried on the DHAQ. Time to completion of the DHAQ and degree of familiarity with computer use were also assessed.
RESULTS: The percentages of donors identifying all 17 items correctly were 9.4, 20.9, and 34.8 percent and the mean percentages recall of items were 53.9, 56.0, and 69.8 percent with DHAQ administration Methods 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p < 0.0001). This difference was largely attributable to the poor recall of items queried as part of a list in Method 1. Mean times to complete the DHAQ were 3.1, 3.8, and 8.1 minutes for Methods 1, 2, and 3, respectively. More than 95 percent of donors had used a personal computer in the past year.
CONCLUSION: The current format of the Canadian DHAQ is not optimal for donor attention to specific questions asked as part of a list. Attention was improved by use of AABB uniform donor history questionnaire format and was best with use of a CASI format.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17725722     DOI: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01329.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transfusion        ISSN: 0041-1132            Impact factor:   3.157


  5 in total

1.  Free blood donation mobile applications.

Authors:  Sofia Ouhbi; José Luis Fernández-Alemán; Ambrosio Toval; Ali Idri; José Rivera Pozo
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 4.460

Review 2.  Selecting the Right Donors - Still a Challenge: Development of a Uniform Donor Questionnaire in Germany.

Authors:  Ruth Offergeld; Margarethe Heiden
Journal:  Transfus Med Hemother       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 3.747

3.  Implementation of an Africa-specific donor health questionnaire for human immunodeficiency virus risk screening.

Authors:  Claude T Tagny; Georges Ikomey; Françoise Ngo Sack; Celestin Achu; Matthias Ndemanou; Catherine Ninmou; Caroline Gesu; Gilbert Essomba; Alexandra Fongue Simo; Georges Nguefack Tsague; Dora Mbanya; Edward Murphy
Journal:  Vox Sang       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 2.996

4.  An analysis of risk factors for human immunodeficiency virus infection among Chinese blood donors.

Authors:  Jingxing Wang; Jing Liu; Yi Huang; Tonghan Yang; Fuzhu Yao; Xiangdong Dong; Guoxin Wen; Xinhong Bi; Mingjiang Zhao; Xiuqiong Wen; Mei Huang; Yunlai Lü; Hongli Ma; Qilu Yu; David Wright; Nan Guo; Paul Ness; Hua Shan
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 3.157

5.  An Original Approach to Evaluating the Quality of Blood Donor Selection: Checking Donor Questionnaires and Analyzing Donor Deferral Rate.

Authors:  Philippe Gillet; Esther Neijens
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2018-03-21
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.