Adverse reactions and other factors that impact subsequent blood donation visits

A randomized controlled trial of post-donation communication materials to increase donor return following a vasovagal reaction

BACKGROUND

Vasovagal reactions (VVRs) are one of the primary reasons for people to stop donating blood. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of newly developed online communications on the rate of return of whole-blood (WB) and plasma donors who experienced a VVR.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

First-time and experienced WB and plasma donors who had a VVR without a loss of consciousness in the previous 3 days were randomly allocated to receive (a) an SMS sent 1-4 days post-VVR (n = 2303), (b) an email sent 6-10 days post-VVR (n = 2360), (c) both the SMS and the email (n = 2248), or (d) business-as-usual donor retention communications (control; n = 2557). Donation data were extracted to determine subsequent donation attempts.

RESULTS

For return within 3 months, WB donors in the Email Only condition had significantly increased odds of returning (OR: 1.26, 95%CI: 1.01-1.56). Subgroup analysis within WB donors showed increased odds of return for women sent the SMS and Email (OR: 1.50, 95%CI: 1.14-1.96) or the Email Only (OR: 1.44, 95%CI: 1.10-1.89), and for first-time donors sent the Email Only (OR: 1.48, 95%CI: 1.07-2.05). At 6 months, only first-time WB donors in the Email Only condition had significantly increased odds of returning (OR: 1.30, 95%CI: 1.01-1.69). No significant effects of the intervention were found for immediate or intermediate return for plasma donors.

DISCUSSION

Sending an email addressing common donor concerns regarding VVRs increases WB donor retention, but additional strategies are needed for the effects to last and to retain plasma donors.

Long-term poor sleep quality is associated with adverse donor reactions in college students in Central China: A population-based cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Adverse donor reaction (ADR) could adversely impact the recruitment and retention of blood donors, but the evidence of effect of sleep quality on ADR is limited and controversial. The goal of this study was to explore the association between the sleep quality and ADR among college students in Wuhan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The college student blood donors in Wuhan from March to May 2022 were recruited. Self-compiled general information questionnaire and Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) were investigated by convenience sampling. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the association.

RESULTS

Among 1014 participants included in this study, 63 were in the ADR group and 951 were in the non-ADR group. Compared with the non-ADR group, the PSQI scores of ADR group were higher (3.44 ± 1.81 vs. 2.78 ± 1.82, p < 0.01). The results of multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that after adjusting gender, body mass index, blood donation history and other potential confounding factors, higher PSQI scores were related to the occurrence of ADRs (odds ratio = 1.231, 95% confidence interval 1.075-1.405), that is, the worse the sleep quality, the more likely the ADRs will occur.

CONCLUSION

The long-term poor sleep quality of college students is a risk factor for the occurrence of ADRs. It should be identified early before blood donation to reduce the incidence of ADRs and improve the safety and satisfaction of donors.

Young apheresis platelet donors show significant and sustained growth over the last decade in the US, 2010-2019: A favorable sign of the resiliency of the platelet supply

BACKGROUND

Platelet demand continues to rise and US hospitals frequently face shortages. The peak median age of apheresis platelet donors (APD) is believed to have increased over the last decade, raising concerns that the APD base is not being adequately replenished with young donors.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS

American Red Cross (ARC) apheresis platelet collections were evaluated from calendar years 2010 through 2019. APD, products per procedure/split rate (PPP) and donation frequencies were stratified into age groups.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

The number of unique APD from calendar year 2010 through 2019 in the ARC donor pool increased from 87,573 to 115,372 donors, representing a 31.7% overall growth. Donors in the 16-40 year-old (y) age group increased by 78.8% overall, with the largest absolute increases seen in the 26-30 y (4852 donors, 99.9% growth), followed by the 31-35 y (3991, 94.1%) group. Donors aged 56+ increased by 50.4% overall, with the largest increase seen in the 66-70 y (5988 donors, 108.1% growth) group. Middle-aged donors, aged 41-55 y, demonstrated a decrease of 16.5%. Over the last decade, the youngest age groups (16-40 y) comprised 61.3% of first-time donors (FTD). Annual donation frequency increased with increasing age and PPP. The highest donation frequencies were seen in the oldest age groups.

CONCLUSION

Although the peak median age of APD increased over the study period, relative contribution of the 16-40 y APD base also increased. Older donors exhibited the highest donation frequencies and thus contributed the largest volume of apheresis platelet units. Platelet donor activity declined in the middle age (41-55 y) group.

Factors associated with first-time and repeat blood donation: Adverse reactions and effects on donor behavior

BACKGROUND

Blood centers have a dual mission to protect donors and patients; donor safety is paramount to maintaining an adequate blood supply. Elucidating donor factors associated with adverse reactions (AR) is critical to this mission.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis of whole blood donors from 2003 to 2020 was conducted at a single blood center in northern California. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% CIs for ARs were estimated via multivariable logistic regression on demographics, donation history, and physical examination data. Where appropriate, Wilcoxon-Rank Sum and chi-squared tests were used to determine significance.

RESULTS

First-time blood donors (FTD) exhibited a higher AR rate than repeat donors (4.4% vs. 1.9% p < .0001). When compared with FTDs without AR, FTDs with ARs (FT-AR) were less likely to return (30.0% vs. 47.3%, p < .0001), and, of those who returned, had a higher rate of reaction 20.2% versus 2.8% (p < .001). Factors found to be associated with FT-AR (younger age, increased heart rate, and higher diastolic blood pressure) still correlated positively with AR on return donation, but to a lower degree. FTD who potentially witnessed an AR had a lower return rate (44.6% vs. 47.3%, p = <.001) and donated fewer units (2.38 vs. 3.37, p < .001) when compared to FTD who did not witness an AR.

CONCLUSION

The AR on FTD increases the AR likelihood of return donation. Longitudinal analysis shows that a time-based deferral policy targeted at FT-AR young donors can reduce the number of ARs while not dramatically impacting the blood supply.

Reporting of delayed adverse donor reactions in whole blood donors: Just the tip of an iceberg!

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The study was planned to determine the incidence and analyze how various epidemiological factors tend to be associated with delayed adverse donor reactions (ADR).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The prospective observational study was conducted in Department of Transfusion Medicine of tertiary care hospital from January to December 2019. Eligible blood donors were observed for any adverse reactions after 15 minutes of removal of phlebotomy needle. Further, telephonic calls were made to each enrolled blood donor on day-2 and day-7 of the whole blood donation. For each day, two calls were made at an interval of 4 hours before declaring the participant to be non-responder.

RESULTS

A total of 1540 (84.1%) blood donors responded on day-2 and 1610 (87.9%) responded on day-7 of follow-up. Total 180 (11.2%) blood donors experienced delayed ADRs. Two donors (1.1%) experienced on-site while 178 (98.89%) reported off-site delayed ADRs when followed-up telephonically. The commonest delayed ADRs reported were bruise (n=72; 30.9%), arm-pain (n=61; 26.2%) and generalised weakness (n=44; 18.9%). Female donors (27.3% vs. 11.2%; P=0.004), first time donors (15.2 vs. 9.9%; P=0.002), donors with low body-weight (range of 45-60kg; 15.9% vs. 11.5% vs. 6.1%; P=0.011) and body mass index<18.5 (24% vs. 12.5% vs. 9.7% vs. 11.3%; P=0.028) experienced more delayed ADRs.

CONCLUSION

Blood donors do experience delayed ADRs but these are not reported to the blood centers as these are usually mild. However, it is important to capture these delayed adverse donor reactions and report it to National Hemovigilance Program so that strategies can be formulated to prevent their occurrence and recurrence.

Plasmavigilance-Adverse events among US Source plasma donors

Background

Source plasma (SP) is the primary starting material for 87% of plasma‐derived medicinal products globally. Plasmavigilance is a program designed to collect, analyze, and monitor donor adverse events (AEs) across the SP collection industry. Donor retention depends on donors having a safe and satisfactory experience. This study analyzes AE rates and SP donor characteristics that may be predictors of an AE.

Study Design and Methods

Donation data for 1.1 million donors making 12,183,182 SP donations over a 4‐month period were analyzed. This represented approximately 72% of the donations collected by the U.S. plasma industry. The Standard for Recording Donor Adverse Events was used for AE definitions and classifications.

Results

The overall AE rate was 15.85/10⁴ donations. The two AEs with the highest rates were Hypotensive and Phlebotomy events (8.32 and 5.91/10⁴ donations, respectively). Females had higher overall AE rates than males (25.76 vs. 9.85/10⁴ donations), and first‐time donors had higher overall AE rates than repeat donors (136.66 vs. 12.37/10⁴ donations). Weight, body mass index, age, and pre‐donation estimated blood volume also were predictors of AE.

Discussion

SP donors have low AE rates with 90% being events classified as Hypotensive or Phlebotomy. Special attention and mitigation strategies should be directed to donors who are young, lightweight (between 100 and 124 pounds), female, or first‐time donors to further reduce the incidence of AE, continue to ensure the donor has a safe experience, and facilitate donor retention.

See editorial on page 2803–2805, in this issue

The safety of COVID-19 convalescent plasma donation: A multi-institutional donor hemovigilance study

BACKGROUND

Although the safety and therapeutic efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) has been extensively evaluated, the safety of CCP donation has not been explored in a multi-institutional context.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Nine blood collection organizations (BCOs) participated in a multi-institutional donor hemovigilance effort to assess the safety of CCP donation. Donor adverse events (DAEs) were defined according to the Standard for Surveillance of Complications Related to Blood Donation, and severity was assessed using the severity grading tool. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine attributes associated with DAE severity.

RESULTS

The overall DAE rate was 37.7 per 1000 donations. Repeat apheresis and apheresis-naïve donors experienced adverse event rates of 19.9 and 49.8 per 1000 donations, respectively. Female donors contributed 51.9% of CCP donations with a DAE rate of 49.4 per 1000 donations. The DAE rate for male donors was 27.4 per 1000 donations. Vasovagal reactions accounted for over half of all reported DAEs (51.1%). After adjustment, volume of CCP donated was associated with vasovagal reaction severity (odds ratio [OR] 6.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5-17.1). Donor age and donation history were also associated with DAE severity. Considerable differences in DAE types and rates were observed across the participating BCOs despite the use of standardized hemovigilance definitions.

CONCLUSION

The safety of CCP donation appears comparable to that of conventional apheresis plasma donation with similar associated risk factors for DAE types and severity.

The vasovagal reaction experience among blood donors: A qualitative study of factors that affect donor return

RATIONALE

Blood collection agencies face ongoing challenges in retaining voluntary donors to meet the demand for blood and blood-related products by healthcare services. A known deterrent to continued blood donation is the experience of a vasovagal reaction (VVR). However, there has been little research into donors' experiences of these reactions and the factors that influence their decision to return, which is essential information to inform strategies to improve donor return.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper was to explore blood donor views and experiences of a VVR, with a particular interest in how the reaction influenced their return behaviour, using the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping.

METHODS

We conducted 34 semi-structured in-depth interviews between February and April 2018 with a sample of Australian donors who had experienced a VVR in the last seven days. Transcripts were analysed using the Framework Method.

RESULTS

The VVR elicited various emotional responses, which appeared to be influenced by social support, being aware of the possibility of experiencing a VVR, or the donation outcome. In turn, the VVR experience affected intentions to return, with those who reported more positive experiences expressing stronger intentions. Further, donors felt more likely to return if they perceived their risk of a recurrent event as low and if they were able to identify appropriate problem and emotion-focused coping strategies.

CONCLUSION

This article provides novel insights into possible ways to encourage blood donor return following a VVR.

The impact of delayed and immediate adverse events on the intention of future donations in whole blood and plateletpheresis donors

BACKGROUND

Adverse donor events (ADEs) are usually mild and short-term with no sequelae, but may cause disinclination toward future donations.

AIMS

To determine the impact of delayed ADEs (D-ADEs) in addition to immediate ADEs (I-ADEs) on the intention of future donations (IFDs) and to analyze the various associated factors.

METHODS

ADEs were categorized following the ISBT working group on donor vigilance. Telephonic interviews of the donors were conducted 2 weeks after the whole blood (WB) and plateletpheresis donation to inquire about D-ADEs and IFDs.

RESULTS

A total of 3514 WB and 531 plateletpheresis donors were included in the study. WB donors had an overall higher IFD as compared to plateletpheresis donors (89.53% vs 57.06%, P < .001). A higher IFD was observed in male WB donors as compared to female WB donors (89.95% vs 75%, P < .001). Repeat WB donors had a higher IFD as compared with first-time donors (93.66% vs 81.37%, P < .001). A total of 13.7% WB donors and 19.2% plateletpheresis donors reported D-ADEs. WB donors who experienced D-ADEs had a significantly lower IFD (78.38% vs 91.63%, P < .001) as compared with donors without any ADEs; a similar trend was observed in donors who experienced I-ADEs (69.90% vs 91.63%, P < .001). In WB donors, systemic D-ADEs such as fatigue had a more negative impact on IFDs as compared with localized D-ADEs such as bruises (63.93% vs 86.83%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both D-ADEs and I-ADEs negatively impact donors' intention to donate again. Systemic D-ADEs had a more negative impact on IFDs as compared with localized D-ADEs.

Donor tolerability of convalescent plasma donation

Background

Since early 2020, convalescent plasma has been widely used for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). There is limited information regarding donor tolerability of convalescent plasma donation. In this study, we evaluated the short‐term donor tolerability of convalescent plasma donation.

Methods

A prospective study of 309 convalescent plasma donation related adverse events were conducted at Wuhan Blood Center of China, from February 12 to April 1, 2020. Additionally, up to 28‐day post‐donation follow‐ups were performed on the donors.

Results

Sixteen (5.2%) adverse events were reported in 309 donations. All of these were mild vasovagal without loss of consciousness. The frequency of adverse reactions was higher in donors with a per donation volume of >8 mL/kg body weight or ≥ 600 mL, <100 mm Hg in pre‐donation systolic blood pressure, or less than 28 days from the onset of COVID‐19 symptoms. There was no correlation to donation history, weight, sex, ABO blood type, pre‐donation diastolic blood pressure, pulse, or hemoglobin.

Conclusion

The donation of convalescent plasma is generally safe. Mitigation of risk factors associated with adverse events can further enhance donor tolerability of convalescent plasma donation.

Incidence and severity of adverse events among platelet donors: A three-year retrospective study

Adverse events (AEs) are unfortunate consequences of platelet donation. This study reports the incidence and severity of AEs and the associated risk factors in platelet donation at a major blood donation center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.A review of donation records was conducted between 2014 and 2017. Eligible study participants were 5007 platelet donors who had donated 7969 times. Each donation was accounted for as a single study subject. Participants' characteristics were described and analyzed as potential contributing factors to adverse events.The average age of platelet donors was 30.0±7.3 years. First-time donors comprised (n = 3,100, 61.9%) of the sample, and 1907 (38.1%) were multiple donors (periodic/routine). Their average BMI was 28.6 ± 4.9 kg/m2. Most donors have blood type "O" and Rheo "positive". The range of blood volume processed was 0 to 5273 ml, while the procedure duration ranged from 0 to 90 minutes. The average platelet yield was 3.8 ± 3.5 ∗1011 platelets per unit, and the average collected volume was 257.6 ± 86.1 ml. Incidence of AEs was 4.2%, of which 91.3% were mild and 8.7% were severe. AEs were vascular injuries (65.3%), vasovagal reactions (11.6%), and citrate toxicity (5.3%). AEs were associated with first-time donation, adj.OR (95%CI) = 1.5 (1.1-1.8) and lower BMI, adj. OR (95% CI) = 1.4 (1.1-1.8). Citrate toxicity was present in severe forms, unlike vascular injuries and vasovagal reactions that tended to be milder. Donors with hemoglobin levels above 16 g/dl, adj. OR (95% CI) = 1.3 (1.1-1.7) and platelet levels below 250,000, adj. OR (95% CI) = 1.3 (1.1-1.6) were more likely to contract AEs than others.Reporting adverse events is essential to establish a benchmark for the annual incidence rates to be compared against local and international figures. Blood donor centers should also take notice of blood donors characteristics that are associated with higher incidence and more severe forms of AEs during or after platelet donation.

Incidence of adverse reaction in blood donation: a systematic review

There are a lot of reports related to adverse reactions post blood donation. The present study is designed to investigate the incidence of adverse reactions in blood donation around the world. This research was conducted through searching databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EmBase, Ovid, as well as the specialized journal of TRANSFUSION without any time limit by using the keywords including "Adverse Event", "Adverse Effect", "Adverse Reaction", "Complication", "Side Effect", "Vasovagal Reaction", "Local Reaction", "General Reaction", "Allergic Reaction", "Blood Donor", and "Blood Donation". In the initial search, 7054 documents were found, of which 2517 duplicates were excluded. After screening the remaining 4,537 documents, 97 one were reviewed for quality assessment, of which 30 with the appropriate quality were selected for the review process. The results of the study showed that the reactions caused by blood donation are very different. Most reactions were systemic, and ranged from 0.08 to 13 percent in different countries. The incidence of adverse reactions in blood donation differ across the countries which might be related to the donors' characteristics. The difference did even existed in studies conducted in the same country and the same year. This suggests that many factors can cause adverse reactions in blood donation, and that a wide range of them investigated in one study, most of which were systemic.

Barriers to blood donation on social media: An analysis of Facebook and Twitter posts

Background

To better understand donor behavior and ensure a safe and sufficient blood supply, various observational studies have examined barriers to blood donation. This study used Facebook and Twitter data to enhance existing research on donation barriers and associated emotions communicated on social media by both donors and non‐donors.

Study design and methods

We conducted a semantic network analysis (SNA) with 168 232 public Dutch language social media messages from Facebook and Twitter during 2012‐2018. SNA uses concepts as nodes in a network and the relationship (ie, co‐occurrence) as links between them. We identified the relationship between donation barriers, non‐donation (voluntary and involuntary), and dissatisfaction (anger and disappointment) within social media messages. This computational method was combined with an analysis examining significant relationships in‐depth.

Results

Twelve donation barriers were identified: lifestyle, donation location, medical reasons, no invitation, opening times, physical reactions, pregnancy, remuneration, sexual risk behavior, time constraints, travels, and waiting times. More messages related to involuntary non‐donation compared to voluntary non‐donation. Involuntary non‐donation was associated most strongly with medical reasons and sexual risk behavior, while voluntary non‐donation was associated most strongly with resentment regarding remuneration of the blood bankʼs top management. Anger associated most strongly with sexual risk behavior and disappointment most strongly with medical reasons.

Conclusion

Discussions around blood donation are increasingly taking place online. Donation barriers found in this study differ from those in survey research. Insights into how donation barriers are communicated in an ever‐growing online environment can be utilized to enhance recruitment and retention strategies.

Joint effects of risk factors on adverse events associated with adult blood donations

The process for blood donation is considered safe, but some adverse events have been reported. Risk factors for adverse events were assessed in this study.A retrospective case-control study was conducted to investigate the risk factors for adverse events after blood donation between 2010 and 2013. Variables such as gender, age, body mass index (BMI), donation status, donation volume, donation site, pre-donation systolic blood pressure (SBP), and pre-donation diastolic blood pressure were compared between donors with and without adverse events. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the joint effects of age, gender, and donation status on adverse events.The incidence of adverse events among adult blood donations was 1287/1,253,678 (0.1%). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, blood donors aged <35 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.99, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.57-3.48), of female gender (OR, 3.30, 95% CI, 2.62-4.15), and with first-time donor status (OR, 6.40, 95% CI, 5.17-7.93), donation of 500 mL (OR, 2.22, 95% CI, 1.83-2.69), predonation SBP <124 mm Hg (OR, 1.25, 95% CI,1.05-1.48) and BMI <24 kg/m (OR, 1.67, 95% CI, 1.42-1.96) were associated with increased likelihood of adverse event. Further analysis with joint effects method revealed that first-time female donors aged <35 years are associated with the highest odds of adverse events when compared with repeat male donors aged ≧35 years (OR, 100.57, 95% CI, 48.45-208.75).The findings of our study should prove useful in identifying donors at risk and planning appropriate strategies for the prevention of adverse effects.

Individual, contextual and network characteristics of blood donors and non-donors: a systematic review of recent literature

BACKGROUND

The ageing population and recent migration flows may negatively affect the blood supply in the long term, increasing the importance of targeted recruitment and retention strategies to address donors. This review sought to identify individual, network and contextual characteristics related to blood donor status and behaviour, to systematically discuss differences between study results, and to identify possible factors to target in recruitment and retention efforts.

METHODS

The systematic review was conducted in accordance with a predefined PROSPERO protocol (CRD42016039591). After quality assessments by multiple independent raters, a final set of 66 peer-reviewed papers, published between October 2009 and January 2017, were included for review.

RESULTS

Individual and contextual characteristics of blood donor status and behaviour were categorised into five main lines of research: donor demographics, motivations and barriers, adverse reactions and deferral, contextual factors, and blood centre factors. Results on donor demographics, motivations and barriers, and contextual factors were inconclusive, differing between studies, countries, and sample characteristics. Adverse reactions and deferral were negatively related to blood donor behaviour. Blood centre factors play an important role in donor management, e.g., providing information, reminders, and (non-)monetary rewards. No studies were found on network characteristics of (non-)donors.

DISCUSSION

Although individual and contextual characteristics strongly relate to blood donor status and behaviour, mechanisms underlying these relations have not been studied sufficiently. We want to stress the importance of longitudinal studies in donor behaviour, exploring the role of life events and network characteristics within blood donor careers. Increased understanding of donor behaviour will assist policy makers of blood collection agencies, with the ultimate goal of safeguarding a sufficient and matching blood supply.

Adverse Reactions in Allogeneic Blood Donors: A Tertiary Care Experience from a Developing Country

OBJECTIVES

Fragmented blood transfusion services along with an unmotivated blood donation culture often leads to blood shortage. Donor retention is crucial to meet the increasing blood demand, and adverse donor reactions have a negative impact on donor return. The aim of this study was to estimate adverse donor reactions and identify any demographic association.  .

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study between January 2011 and December 2013. A total of 41,759 healthy donors were enrolled. Professionally trained donor attendants drew blood and all donors were observed during and following donation for possible adverse events for 20 minutes. Blood donors were asked to report if they suffered from any delayed adverse consequences.  .

RESULTS

Out of 41,759 blood donors, 537 (1.3%) experienced adverse reactions. The incidence was one in every 78 donations. The mean age of donors who experienced adverse events was 26.0±6.8 years, and all were male. Out of 537 donors, 429 (80%) developed vasovagal reaction (VVR), 133 (25%) had nausea, 63 (12%) fainted, 35 (6%) developed hyperventilation, 9 (2%) had delayed syncope, and 9 (2%) developed hematoma. Arterial prick, nerve injury, cardiac arrest, and seizures were not observed. Donors aged less than < 30 years and weighing < 70 kg were significantly associated with VVR, hyperventilation, and nausea (p < 0.005). Undergraduates and Urdu speaking donors also had a significant association with fainting and nausea, respectively (p < 0.05).  .

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of adverse events was low at our tertiary center. A VVR was the predominant adverse reaction and was associated with age and weight. Our study highlights the importance of these parameters in the donation process. A well-trained and experienced phlebotomist and pre-evaluation counseling of blood donors could further minimize the adverse reactions.

Complications related to blood donation: A multicenter study of the prevalence and influencing factors in voluntary blood donation camps in Karnataka, India

Introduction:

Complications associated with blood donation significantly lower odds of subsequent donations. The aim of the study is to assess the prevalence of complications related to blood donation, identify the influencing factors, and come up with suggestions for minimizing discomfort to donors and making outdoor voluntary blood donation camps safer.

Materials and Methods:

This study covered 181 blood donation camps organized by Sankalp India Foundation where 16 blood banks participated from 01-04-2011 to 01-08-2014 in Karnataka. Uniform protocols for donor selection, predonation preparation, counseling, postdonation care, and refreshments were used. The postdonation complications were recorded on a form immediately, after they were observed.

Results:

We observed 995 (3.2%) complications in 30,928 whole blood donations. Of these 884 (2.86%) mild, 77 (0.25%) moderate, and 5 (0.02%) severe complications were observed. Local symptoms (blood outside vessels, pain, and allergy) contributed 1.0%, and generalized symptoms (vasovagal reaction) contributed 2.2% to all the complications.

Conclusion:

We observed 322 complications for every 10,000 donations. Since 27 out of every 10000 experience moderate and severe complication, the readiness to manage complications is crucial. Women donors, young donors, and donors with a lower weight are at a significantly greater risk of experiencing complications, highlighting the need for specific guidelines for the management of higher risk donor groups. Complications varied significantly between various blood banks. Predonation hydration was effective in limiting complications with generalized symptoms. We recommend a robust donor hemovigilance program for voluntary blood donation for monitoring complications and enable assessment of effectiveness and implementation of appropriate interventions.

Citrate anticoagulation: Are blood donors donating bone?

An estimated 2.4 million volunteer apheresis blood donation procedures were performed in the United States in 2010, and increases in the proportion of transfused blood products derived from apheresis blood collections have been consistently reported. Anticoagulation is required during apheresis and is achieved with citrate. Donor exposure to citrate causes an acute physiological response to maintain serum mineral homeostasis. Some data are available on the sequelae of this acute response in the days and weeks following exposure, raising questions about bone mineral density in regular apheresis donors. New research is emerging that addresses the potential long-term health outcomes of repeated citrate exposure. This article reviews the acute physiological response to citrate anticoagulation in volunteer blood donors, presents contrasting perspectives on the potential effects of citrate exposure on bone density, and identifies key knowledge gaps in our understanding of long-term health outcomes in apheresis donors. J. Clin. Apheresis 31:459-463, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Donor vigilance data of a blood transfusion service: A multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND

Donor vigilance is an important part of the quality management system of blood transfusion services. The evaluation of donor side effects helps to improve the donation process and donor compliance. The aim of the present study was to evaluate donor vigilance data in whole blood and plasmapheresis donors of a blood donor service.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Donors fulfilling current national and European eligibility criteria underwent whole blood and plasmapheresis donation (PCS and MCS+ (Haemonetics, Braintree, USA), A 200 (Fenwal, Round Lake, USA). Whole blood was collected at fixed and mobile sites while plasmaphereses were performed at 8 plasma centers. From 2011 to 2013 donor information was provided for gender, age, body weight, height, first and repeat donation. Donors were monitored for venipuncture and circulatory associated side effects.

RESULTS

The total incidences of adverse events were 5004 (0.56%) in repeat donors and 2111 (2.78%) in first time donors for whole blood donation and 3323 (1.01%) and 514 (7.96%) for plasmaphereses, respectively. Circulatory associated events were 2679 (0.30%) for whole blood donation and 1624 (0.49%) for plasmaphereses.

CONCLUSION

Our donor vigilance data of a blood transfusion service show that whole blood and plasmapheresis are safe with low incidences of adverse events. Repeat donation and age are predictors for low rates of adverse events. On the other hand, first time donation and female gender were associated with higher incidences of adverse events.

Donor research in australia: challenges and promise

Donors are the key to the core business of Blood Collection Agencies (BCAs). However, historically, they have not been a focus of research undertaken by these organizations. This model is now changing, with significant donor research groups established in a number of countries, including Australia. Donor research in the Australian Red Cross Blood Service (Blood Service) is concentrated in the Donor and Community Research (DCR) team. Cognizant of the complex and ever-changing landscape with regard to optimal donor management, the DCR team collaborates with academics located at universities around Australia to coordinate a broad program of research that addresses both short- and-long term challenges to the blood supply. This type of collaboration is not, however, without challenges. Two major collaborative programs of the Blood Service's research, focusing on i) the recruitment and retention of plasmapheresis donors and ii) the role of the emotion pride in donor motivation and return, are showcased to elucidate how the challenges of conducting collaborative BCA research can be met. In so doing, these and the other research programs described herein demonstrate how the Blood Service supports and contributes to research that not only revises operational procedures but also contributes to advances in basic science.

Management of young blood donors

The emphasis on high-school blood drives and acceptance of 16-year-old blood donors led to more research on physiologic and psychological ways to decrease vasovagal reaction rates in young blood donors and to increase donor retention. Research on how to accomplish this has been advantageous for the blood collection industry and blood donors. This review discussed the current situation and what can be done psychologically, physiologically, and via process improvements to decrease vasovagal reaction rates and increase donor retention. The donation process can be significantly improved. Future interventions may include more dietary salt, a shorter muscle tension program to make it more feasible, recommendations for post-donation muscle tension / squatting / laying down for lightheadedness, more donor education by the staff at the collection site, more staff attention to donors with fear or higher risk for a vasovagal reaction (e.g. estimated blood volume near 3.5 l, first-time donor), and a more focused donation process to ensure a pleasant and safer procedure.

Risk factors for complications in donors at first and repeat whole blood donation: a cohort study with assessment of the impact on donor return

BACKGROUND

First-time donation is among recognised risk factors for vasovagal reactions to blood donation and reactions are known to reduce donor return. We assessed associations between potential risk factors and vasovagal reactions and needle-related complications in first-time whole blood donation in comparison to repeat donation and analysed the impact of complications on donor return.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a cohort study on whole blood donations in The Netherlands from 1/1/2010 to 31/12/2010 using data extracted from the blood service information system. Donation data up to 31/12/2011 were used to ascertain donor return.

RESULTS

In 2010 28,786 donors made first whole blood donations and there were 522,958 repeat donations. Vasovagal reactions occurred in 3.9% of first donations by males and 3.5% of first donations by females compared to in 0.2% and 0.6%, respectively, of repeat donations. Associations of vasovagal reactions with other factors including age, body weight, systolic and diastolic blood pressure were similar in first-time and repeat donors. Needle-related complications occurred in 0.2% of male and 0.5% of female first-time donations and in 0.1% and 0.3%, respectively, of repeat donations. Among first-time donors, the return rate within 1 year was 82% following an uncomplicated first donation, but 55% and 61% following vasovagal reactions and needle-related complications, respectively; the corresponding percentages among repeat donors were 86%, 58% and 82%.

DISCUSSION

Among first-time donors, females suffered less than males from vasovagal reactions. Other risk factors had similar associations among first-time and repeat donors. Vasovagal reactions and needle-related complications in both first-time and repeat donors are followed by reduced donor return.

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute retrovirus epidemiology donor studies (Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study and Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study-II): twenty years of research to advance blood product safety and availability

The Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study (REDS), conducted from 1989 to 2001, and the REDS-II, conducted from 2004 to 2012, were National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-funded, multicenter programs focused on improving blood safety and availability in the United States. The REDS-II also included international study sites in Brazil and China. The 3 major research domains of REDS/REDS-II have been infectious disease risk evaluation, blood donation availability, and blood donor characterization. Both programs have made significant contributions to transfusion medicine research methodology by the use of mathematical modeling, large-scale donor surveys, innovative methods of repository sample storage, and establishing an infrastructure that responded to potential emerging blood safety threats such as xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus. Blood safety studies have included protocols evaluating epidemiologic and/or laboratory aspects of human immunodeficiency virus, human T-lymphotropic virus 1/2, hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B virus, West Nile virus, cytomegalovirus, human herpesvirus 8, parvovirus B19, malaria, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, influenza, and Trypanosoma cruzi infections. Other analyses have characterized blood donor demographics, motivations to donate, factors influencing donor return, behavioral risk factors, donors' perception of the blood donation screening process, and aspects of donor deferral. In REDS-II, 2 large-scale blood donor protocols examined iron deficiency in donors and the prevalence of leukocyte antibodies. This review describes the major study results from over 150 peer-reviewed articles published by these 2 REDS programs. In 2011, a new 7-year program, the Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-III, was launched. The Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-III expands beyond donor-based research to include studies of blood transfusion recipients in the hospital setting and adds a third country, South Africa, to the international program.

Questionnaire-related deferrals in regular blood donors in norway

Voluntary donation is a key issue in transfusion medicine. To ensure the safety of blood transfusions, careful donor selection is important. Although new approaches to blood safety have dramatically reduced the risks for infectious contamination of blood components, the quality and the availability of blood components depend on the willingness to donate and the reliability of the information given by the donors about their own health, including risk behavior. As donors who are deferred by the blood bank will be less motivated to return for donation, it is important to reduce the number of deferrals. The aims of the present study were to investigate the reasons for deferral of registered donors coming to the blood bank for donation, in order to identify areas of importance for donor education-as these deferrals potentially could be avoided by better donor comprehension. Deferral related to testing of donors is not included in this study as these deferrals are dependent on laboratory results and cannot be indentified by questionnaire or interview. Data were collected from all blood donors in a period for 18 months who came for blood donation at a large university hospital in Norway. 1 163 of the 29 787 regular donors, who showed up for donation, were deferred (3.9%). The main reasons were intercurrent illness (n = 182) (15.6%), skin ulcers (n = 170) (14.6%), and risk behaviour (n = 127) (10.9%). In a community, intercurrent illnesses, skin ulcers, and potential risk behavior are the most frequent reasons for deferral of regular donors. Strategized effort on donor education is needed, as "failure to donate" reduces donor motivation.

Vasovagal reactions in whole blood donors at three REDS-II blood centers in Brazil

BACKGROUND

In Brazil little is known about adverse reactions during donation and the donor characteristics that may be associated with such events. Donors are offered snacks and fluids before donating and are required to consume a light meal after donation. For these reasons the frequency of reactions may be different than those observed in other countries.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted of eligible whole blood donors at three large blood centers located in Brazil between July 2007 and December 2009. Vasovagal reactions (VVRs) along with donor demographic and biometric data were collected. Reactions were defined as any presyncopal or syncopal event during the donation process. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of VVRs.

RESULTS

Of 724,861 donor presentations, 16,129 (2.2%) VVRs were recorded. Rates varied substantially between the three centers: 53, 290, and 381 per 10,000 donations in Recife, São Paulo, and Belo Horizonte, respectively. Although the reaction rates varied, the donor characteristics associated with VVRs were similar (younger age [18-29 years], replacement donors, first-time donors, low estimated blood volume [EBV]). In multivariable analysis controlling for differences between the donor populations in each city younger age, first-time donor status, and lower EBV were the factors most associated with reactions.

CONCLUSION

Factors associated with VVRs in other locations are also evident in Brazil. The difference in VVR rates between the three centers might be due to different procedures for identifying and reporting the reactions. Potential interventions to reduce the risk of reactions in Brazil should be considered.