Behaviour based screening questions and potential donation loss using the "for the assessment of individualised risk" screening criteria: A Canadian perspective

Acceptability of sexual history questions in a gender-neutral risk assessment for blood donation

BACKGROUND

Currently in Australia, men are deferred from donating blood if they have had sex with another man within the past 3  months. However, a proposed gender-neutral assessment (GNA) process will ask all donors questions about sex with new or multiple recent partners, with deferral based on responses to a question about anal sex. Understanding the acceptability of such questions among existing and potential blood donors is paramount for successful implementation of GNA.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We used data from a nationally representative survey to estimate the levels of comfort with the proposed GNA questions among the Australian population and subgroups, defined by self-reported ethnicity and religion. Respondents were aged over 18 and living in Australia. Results were weighted to represent the population.

RESULTS

Most of the 5178 respondents described themselves as comfortable with answering questions about new partners (73.1%) or anal sex (64.0%) to donate blood. However, 2.2% and 4.5% indicated that questions about new sex partners and anal sex, respectively, would stop them from donating, and 4.4% and 7.7% respectively, said they were "completely uncomfortable." By religion, the least comfortable were Muslim or Eastern Orthodox respondents, and by country of birth, the least comfortable were those born in the Middle East, followed by those born in Southern Europe and Asia.

DISCUSSION

GNA appears to be broadly acceptable in the Australian context, but our findings suggest that key GNA questions are less acceptable in some population subgroups, indicating a need for targeted campaigns that consider cultural sensitivities.

Modeling US blood donor deferrals under a policy of individual risk assessment for HIV risk sexual behavior

BACKGROUND

In May 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released final guidance for blood donor eligibility that recommended the elimination of 3-month deferral for men who have sex with men (MSM) and the related deferral for women who have sex with MSM. In its place, FDA introduced an individual risk assessment policy of asking all presenting blood donors, regardless of sex or gender, if they have had a new partner or more than one sexual partner in the last 3 months and deferring those who also report anal sex (penile-anal intercourse) during this period. We modeled the possible impact of this policy on the US blood donor base.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We developed a computational model to estimate the percentage of blood donors who would be deferred under a policy of individual HIV risk assessment. The model incorporated demographic information about donors and national survey data on HIV risk behaviors and included age and sex distributions and dependencies.

RESULTS

Our model estimates that approximately 1.2% of US blood donors would be deferred under the individual HIV risk assessment paradigm.

DISCUSSION

The model predicts a relatively minor effect of replacing the time-based deferral for MSM with individual risk-based deferral for sexual behavior. As US blood centers implement this new policy, the effect may be mitigated by donor gains, which warrant further study. The new policy is unlikely to adversely affect the availability of blood and blood components.

Implementation of sexual risk behavior donor screening in Canada

BACKGROUND

The two Canadian blood suppliers, Canadian Blood Services and Héma-Québec, removed the time-based deferral for men who have sex with men and adopted criteria assessing sexual risk behaviors. We report the impact of these changes on the safety and adequacy of the Canadian blood supply.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Since 2022, all donors are asked if (1) they have had a new partner and (2) more than one sexual partner in the last 3 months. Donors answering yes to either question are asked if they had anal sex in the last 3 months; if yes, they are deferred for 3 months. We followed HIV rates for the 18 months before and 14 (Héma-Québec) or 18 months (Canadian Blood Services) post-implementation and interviewed HIV-positive whole blood donors. We assessed the number and characteristics of whole blood donors answering yes to the two first questions with or without deferral.

RESULTS

There were four HIV-positive donations out of 1,492,355 donations pre-implementation and four out of 1,447,772 post-implementation (0.27/100,000 vs. 0.28/100,000, p = 1.00). Post-implementation, one HIV-positive donor was non-compliant with multiple criteria, no risk factors were identified in the others. 3.2% of donors answered yes to questions (1) and/or (2); 0.17% were deferred for a new partner and/or more than one partner and anal sex. Deferral rates were highest in first time, younger donors, and similar in males and females.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of sexual risk behavior donor screening resulted in unchanged HIV rates to date and a manageable deferral rate.

Qualitative analysis of Canadian blood and plasma donors' views on expanding donor screening eligibility for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men

BACKGROUND

In many countries, sexually active gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) continue to be screened based on their sex or gender and the sex or gender of their sexual partner. However, there is growing support that screening based on specific sexual behaviors that pose risk of transfusion transmissible infection is a better approach to donor screening.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This paper reports results from Phase 1 (qualitative) of a mixed-methods study on Canadian blood and plasma donors' views on expanding eligibility for gbMSM by changing to sexual behavior-based screening. Semistructured interview data with 40 donors (whole blood = 20, plasma = 20; male = 21, female = 18, nonbinary = 1; mean age = 46.2; 10% participation rate) in Canada were analyzed using a thematic approach.

RESULTS

All participants, except one, supported the change as they anticipated that at least one of three outcomes would be achieved: increasing blood supply, enhancing equity, and improving or maintaining the safety of blood supply. One donor who was more skeptical of the change questioned the scientific evidence for the change and indicated mistrust of state institutions. The discussion considers implications for blood operators' communication strategies that can be used to reduce donor discomfort with the changes to donor screening.

CONCLUSION

In a nonrandom, purposive sample of 40 Canadian blood and plasma donors, most participants held favorable views regarding expanding the eligibility of gbMSM donors based on sexual risk behavior. Understanding donors' views on increasing eligibility may inform Canadian Blood Services and other blood operators as they develop their communications plans.

MSM and blood donation: shifting to individualized risk assessment

Deferring donors at higher risk for transfusion transmissible infections is an important part of ensuring blood safety. The deferral for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) was implemented in the 1980s in many countries, since they were identified as a high-risk group for AIDS/HIV. With the introduction of increasingly sensitive HIV antibody testing, augmented by nucleic acid testing, the window period for HIV infection-when a donor may be infectious but have negative test results-has shrunk dramatically. In Canada, this has led to progressively shorter deferral periods for gbMSM, decreasing from a permanent deferral for sex with another male since 1977 to a 5-year, 12-month, and eventually 3-month deferral period. These time-based deferrals maintained safety; however, they are seen as stigmatizing by many and still result in the deferral of sexually active gbMSM. More recently, several countries have moved to a donor screening approach based on assessing sexual risk behaviors in all donors. This article outlines research supporting changes in policy, current eligibility screening policies in several countries, and preliminary results postimplementation of new eligibility policies in Canada in September 2022.

Men who have sex with men and risk for transfusion-transmissible infections in blood donors in Western countries: A systematic review update

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This systematic review update summarizes evidence concerning transfusion-transmissible infections (TTIs) in male blood donors reporting sex with another man (MSM) or after easing the MSM deferral period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched five databases, including studies comparing MSM versus non-MSM donors (Type I), MSM deferral periods (Type II) or infected versus non-infected donors (Type III) in Western countries, and used GRADE to determine evidence certainty.

RESULTS

Twenty-five observational studies were included. Four Type I studies suggest that there may be an increased risk for overall TTIs, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV) and syphilis in MSM donors, but the evidence is very uncertain. There was insufficient evidence of MSM with low-risk sexual behaviour. A Type II study indicates that easing the MSM deferral period to 1 year may have little to no effect on TTI risk. TTI prevalence in blood donors under 5-year, 1-year, 3-month or risk-based deferral in eight other Type II studies was too low to provide clear conclusions on the effect of easing the deferral. Three Type III studies reported that MSM may be a risk factor for HIV. Increased risk of HBV, hepatitis C virus and HTLV-I/II could not be shown. The evidence from Type III studies is very uncertain.

CONCLUSION

There may be an increased risk of HIV in MSM blood donors. Shortening the deferral from permanent to 1 year may have little to no effect on TTI risk. However, there is limited, unclear evidence from observational studies concerning the impact of introducing 3-month or risk-based deferrals.

Evolving the gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men time-based deferral to sexual risk screening for all donors: The contribution of Canadian research programmes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In Canada, the time deferral for gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) to donate blood has gradually decreased. In September 2022, this deferral was replaced with sexual behaviour-based screening for all donors. We investigate how data from targeted research programmes addressed knowledge gaps to support this change.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a scoping review describing the Canadian literature available before the research programmes relating to (1) behavioural indicators of HIV risk and (2) attitudes to blood donation among gbMSM, current donors and the general population. We summarize the targeted research programmes, their outputs and impact to date.

RESULTS

For question 1, five projects met inclusion criteria. For question 2, three articles met inclusion criteria. Knowledge gaps identified were insufficient evidence of HIV incidence in gbMSM who met other donor eligibility criteria and scant data on opinions and views of blood donation and screening criteria for sexual risk behaviours. The research programmes funded 19 projects at 11 different research sites involving over 100 individual researchers/collaborators resulting in 19 peer-reviewed publications to date. Leveraging existing gbMSM cohorts yielded relevant HIV incidence data to inform safety modelling studies. Findings indicated that sexual behaviour-based screening was acceptable to gbMSM and donors, and donor discomfort around specific questions could be mitigated with clear explanations.

CONCLUSION

Targeted research programmes filled critical knowledge gaps and informed a change to gender-neutral, sexual behaviour-based screening for all donors. Findings supported successful implementation of these changes with research-informed staff training.

Perceived risk of HIV transmission by blood transfusion among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) in Australia

BACKGROUND

In Australia, men who have sex with men (MSM) are deferred from blood donation for 3 months from last sexual contact. Internationally, deferral policies for MSM are evolving in the direction of expanded inclusivity in response to community expectations. To inform future policy options, we assessed perceptions of the risk of HIV transmission from blood transfusion among Australian MSM.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Flux is an online prospective cohort of Australian gay and bisexual men (cis or trans, regardless of their sexual history) and other men who have had sex with men (gbMSM). We included questions on blood donation rules, window period (WP) duration, infectivity of blood from people with HIV on treatment and attitudes to more detailed questioning of sexual practices in the regular survey of Flux participants and conducted a descriptive analysis of responses.

RESULTS

Of 716 Flux participants in 2019, 703 responded to the blood donation questions. The mean age was 43.7 years (SD 13.6 years). Overall, 74% were willing to confidentially respond to specific sexual behavior questions, such as the last time they had sex and the type of sex they had, in order to be considered eligible to donate blood. The majority (92%) of participants correctly assessed the duration of the WP as less than 1 month. When asked whether transfusion of blood from a donor with HIV and an undetectable viral load could transmit HIV, just under half (48%) correctly said yes.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests Australian gbMSM are generally comfortable with answering more detailed questions regarding sexual activity during the assessment to donate, indicating they would do so honestly. gbMSM are knowledgeable about the WP duration, important for their ability to correctly self-assess their HIV risk. However, half of participants incorrectly assessed the transmissibility by blood transfusion from an HIV positive person with an undetectable viral load, suggesting the need for a targeted education campaign.

Alternatives to blood donor deferral of gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men: Acceptability of screening the sexual risk behavior of all blood donors

BACKGROUND

Blood operators screen donors to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs). Many are evolving screening procedures from those that defer all who have had a sexual interaction with gay, bisexual, or other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) to an approach that assesses individual donors' recent sexual risk behavior with any partner.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A representative sample of current blood donors (N = 1194) was recruited online and randomized to complete either the existing (at the time of the study) Canadian Blood Services' donor questionnaire (DQ) that screens out those with recent gbMSM sexual experience, a modified donor questionnaire (MDQ) that assesses individuals' recent sexual behavior with any partner, or an MDQ that assesses individual sexual behavior with any partner and explains why these questions are asked. Respondents were asked for their perceptions concerning difficulty, comfort, and acceptability of these screening questionnaires.

RESULTS

Across experimental conditions, current donors regarded screening questionnaire difficulty to be low; discomfort in responding was minimal; screening questionnaires were perceived to be relatively inoffensive and justified, and very few donors would cease donating if the screening questionnaire they responded to became the one in general use. Some minor sex differences were observed, and in some cases, perceptions of the MDQ with explanation were somewhat more positive than those of the DQ and MDQ without explanation.

DISCUSSION

An individual risk behavior screening approach appears to be acceptable to current blood donors as an alternative to screening out all who have recently engaged in gbMSM sexual interactions.

Influence of risk perception on attitudes toward blood donation among Brazilian men who have sex with men who donated blood

BACKGROUND

We hypothesize that awareness of individuals' risk behaviors may influence aspects of attitude toward blood donation (i.e., intentions and self-efficacy). Investigating this association in the population of MSM was the objective of the present study.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study based on an open web survey. The online survey was developed and applied on the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) platform. The study's information, invitation to participate, and link to access the online survey were disseminated using social media. Analyses were performed using structural equation modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 764 young adults MSM participated, with the majority self-reporting as homosexual, single, in good health, and having completed higher education. A total of 297 (39.5%) reported having donated blood at least once in their lives. Among blood donors, 72.0% admitted to lying about their sexual behavior during the blood donation clinical screening interview; 81.0% did not believe that their behaviors put them at risk for HIV infection; 83.7% believed that their blood is safe enough to be transfused. Structural equation analysis provided evidence that the perception of being at risk for HIV and the perception of having non-safe blood to be transfused contributed to an attitude against future blood donation (explained variance 50%).

DISCUSSION

Attitude plays an important role in blood donation decision-making by young adults MSM. This is the first study to provide evidence that the self-perceptions of being at risk for HIV and having non-safe blood may deter MSM from blood donation.