[Clinical selection of blood donors]

[Evaluation of the efficacy of medical screening of blood donors on preventing blood transfusion-transmitted infectious agents]

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of medical screening to retain blood donors in window period by comparing the seroprevalence of infectious agents (HIV, hepatitis B and C, syphilis) in deferred versus accepted blood donors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective and transversal study was performed during 4 months in the National Blood Transfusion Center in Dakar (Senegal). We conducted a convenience sampling comparing the seroprevalence of infectious agents (HIV, HBsAg, HCV and syphilis) in deferred versus accepted blood donors after medical selection.

RESULTS

In total, 8219 blood donors were included. Medical selection had authorized 8048 donors (97.92%) and deferred donors were 171 (2.08%). The prevalence of HIV was higher in the deferred than in accepted blood donors (1.75% vs. 0.05%) (P=0.0003; OR=35.91), as well as for HBsAg (12.87% vs. 7.35%) (P=0.006; OR=1.86). HCV antibodies were present in 0.71% of accepted blood donors and 0.58% in deferred blood donors (P=0.65; OR=0.82). Only accepted donors had brought the infection of syphilis (0.34%) (P=0.56; OR=0).

CONCLUSION

Medical selection is efficient to exclude blood donors at high risk of HIV transmission and to a lesser extent of HBV. However, current medical screening procedures do not allow us to exclude donors asymptomatic carriers of HCV and syphilis.

Factors for viral infection in blood donors of South Kivu in the Democratic Republic of Congo

INTRODUCTION

Assessing the knowledge, attitudes, practices and behaviors among blood donors in South Kivu and identify risk factors for viral markers.

METHODS

A descriptive and analytical cross-sectional study involved 595 blood donors in the city of Bukavu (Head city of the province of South Kivu) in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.

RESULTS

Our sample consisted of 70.3% men with a median age of 23 and 77% of young people fewer than 30 years. The score of knowledge and attitude of blood donor's volunteer on blood safety were assessed at 23.5% and 79.1%. A statistically significant difference was observed between the loyal and new blood donors volunteer (25.1% vs 64.6% p < 0.001); between blood donors volunteer of low and high education level (p = 0.04). Motivation to donate blood in 95.9% of cases respect ethical rules of donation. The prevalence of viral markers in blood donors is as follows: 4.8% hepatitis B, 3.9% hepatitis C, 1.6% HIV. For HIV, the low level of education and replacement blood donors are most at risk, the antigen of hepatitis B is observed in blood donors over 30 years, blood donors living couple.

CONCLUSION

General knowledge on blood safety is very low in the first link in the chain transfusion (blood donors). A good education of this population conducted by the transfusion service reinforced building (training and support) is needed.

Transfusion safety in francophone African countries: an analysis of strategies for the medical selection of blood donors

BACKGROUND

The goal of selecting a healthy blood donor is to safeguard donors and reduce the risks of infections and immunologic complications for recipients.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

To evaluate the blood donor selection process, a survey was conducted in 28 blood transfusion centers located in 15 francophone African countries. Data collected included availability of blood products, risk factors for infection identified among blood donor candidates, the processing of the information collected before blood collection, the review process for the medical history of blood donor candidates, and deferral criteria for donor candidates.

RESULTS

During the year 2009, participating transfusion centers identified 366,924 blood donor candidates. A mean of 13% (range, 0%-36%) of the donor candidates were excluded based solely on their medical status. The main risk factors for blood-borne infections were having multiple sex partners, sexual intercourse with occasional partners, and religious scarification. Most transfusion centers collected this information verbally instead of having a written questionnaire. The topics least addressed were the possible complications relating to the donation, religious scarifications, and history of sickle cell anemia and hemorrhage. Only three centers recorded the temperature of the blood donors. The deferral criteria least reported were sickle cell anemia, piercing, scarification, and tattoo.

CONCLUSIONS

The medical selection process was not performed systemically and thoroughly enough, given the regional epidemiologic risks. It is essential to identify the risk factors specific to francophone African countries and modify the current medical history questionnaires to develop a more effective and relevant selection process.

[Predonation interview by a trained and authorized paramedical staff: feasibility, reliability and safety]

INTRODUCTION

Predonation interview accounts for a major step in transfusion safety. In France, it must be performed by a physician, following a methodical questioning and a standardized questionnaire. Faced with this evolution, the value of a strictly medical expertise has been progressively losing importance. In many countries, blood donor selection is being organized by non medical trained staff (Québec, Switzerland, e.g.). A decree of April 30, 2006 allowed the Établissement français du sang to experiment a predonation interview by an authorized paramedical staff in the form of a two-phase prospective multicenter study over a year.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Phase I "experimental situation": six physician/nurse teams among three blood transfusion centres interviewed 1940 blood-donation candidates, including 253 new donors (13% out of total). Phase 2 "observational study": 3222 blood-donation candidates were interviewed either by a physician or a nurse.

RESULTS

In phase I, nurses were able to make a decision without the physician's help in 1921 cases. A total of 1628 candidates were decided capable of donating blood both by physicians and nurses, 174 donors were rejected both by physicians and nurses and 69 were rejected either by physicians or nurses. In phase 2, out of 3222 blood-donation candidates, an average of 12.1% were rejected by nurses and 10% by physicians.

CONCLUSION

The study reported a weaker variability among nurses. Results show that nurses were able to perform predonation interviews with high reliability, without additional risk. The reproducibility of their answers in the field of recipient-risk evaluation was better than the physicians.