Julia C Cutts1, Brendan Quinn1,2, Clive R Seed3, George Kotsiou3, Ruth Pearson1, Nick Scott1,2, David P Wilson1, Mary Ellen Harrod4, Lisa Maher1,5, Sharon Caris6, Alex J Thompson7, Michael Farrell8, Joanne Pink3, Margaret E Hellard1,2,9,10. 1. Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Australian Red Cross Lifeblood, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. NSW Users and AIDS Association, Surry Hills, New South Wales, Australia. 5. Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 6. Haemophilia Foundation Australia, Malvern East, Victoria, Australia. 7. Department of Gastroenterology, St Vincent's Hospital and the University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 8. National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 9. Department of Infectious Diseases, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 10. Doherty Institute and School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pre-donation screening of potential blood donors is critical for ensuring the safety of the donor blood supply, and donor deferral as a result of risk factors is practised worldwide. This systematic review was conducted in the context of an expert review convened by the Australian Red Cross Lifeblood in 2013 to consider Lifeblood's injecting drug use (IDU)-related policies and aimed to identify studies assessing interventions to improve compliance with deferral criteria in blood donation settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE/PubMed, OVID Medline, OVID Embase, LILACS, and the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL and DARE) databases were searched for studies conducted within blood donation settings that examined interventions to increase blood donor compliance with deferral criteria. Observational and experimental studies from all geographical areas were considered. RESULTS: Ten studies were identified that tested at least one intervention to improve blood donor compliance with deferral criteria, including computerized interviews or questionnaires, direct and indirect oral questioning, educational materials, and a combination of a tickbox questionnaire and a personal donor interview. High-quality evidence from a single study was provided for the effectiveness of a computerized interview in improving detection of HIV risk behaviour. Low-quality evidence for the effectiveness of computerized interviews was provided by 3 additional studies. Two studies reported a moderate effect of direct questioning in increasing donor deferral, but the quality of the evidence was low. CONCLUSION: This review identified several interventions to improve donor compliance that have been tested in blood donation settings and provided evidence for the effectiveness of computerized interviews in improving detection of risk factors.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pre-donation screening of potential blood donors is critical for ensuring the safety of the donor blood supply, and donor deferral as a result of risk factors is practised worldwide. This systematic review was conducted in the context of an expert review convened by the Australian Red Cross Lifeblood in 2013 to consider Lifeblood's injecting drug use (IDU)-related policies and aimed to identify studies assessing interventions to improve compliance with deferral criteria in blood donation settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE/PubMed, OVID Medline, OVID Embase, LILACS, and the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL and DARE) databases were searched for studies conducted within blood donation settings that examined interventions to increase blood donor compliance with deferral criteria. Observational and experimental studies from all geographical areas were considered. RESULTS: Ten studies were identified that tested at least one intervention to improve blood donor compliance with deferral criteria, including computerized interviews or questionnaires, direct and indirect oral questioning, educational materials, and a combination of a tickbox questionnaire and a personal donor interview. High-quality evidence from a single study was provided for the effectiveness of a computerized interview in improving detection of HIV risk behaviour. Low-quality evidence for the effectiveness of computerized interviews was provided by 3 additional studies. Two studies reported a moderate effect of direct questioning in increasing donor deferral, but the quality of the evidence was low. CONCLUSION: This review identified several interventions to improve donor compliance that have been tested in blood donation settings and provided evidence for the effectiveness of computerized interviews in improving detection of risk factors.
Authors: Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Gunn E Vist; Regina Kunz; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Holger J Schünemann Journal: BMJ Date: 2008-04-26
Authors: Brendan Quinn; Clive Seed; Anthony Keller; Lisa Maher; David Wilson; Michael Farrell; Sharon Caris; Jennifer Williams; Annie Madden; Alexander Thompson; Joanne Pink; Margaret E Hellard Journal: Int J Drug Policy Date: 2017-06-27
Authors: Brendan Quinn; Ruth Pearson; Julia Cutts; Clive Seed; Nick Scott; Veronica Hoad; Paul Dietze; David Wilson; Lisa Maher; Alexander Thompson; Michael Farrell; Mary Harrod; Sharon Caris; Joanne Pink; George Kotsiou; Margaret Hellard Journal: Vox Sang Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 2.144