Online responses to motivational interview questions enhance blood donation intention

COVID-19 convalescent plasma donors: Unique motivations in unique times?

BACKGROUND

Early in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, many blood collection organizations (BCOs) were asked to collect and distribute COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) as a potential treatment for this new virus and resulting disease. However, recruiting CCP donors presented unique challenges for BCOs, as there were few recovered patients at this time, and like the general population, most potential CCP donors had no blood donation experience. Thus, many CCP donors were new donors, and their donation motivations were unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Donors who gave CCP at least once between April 27th and September 15th, 2020, were emailed a link to an online survey regarding their experience with COVID-19 and their motivations for donating CCP and blood.

RESULTS

Of the 14,225 invitations sent, 3471 donors responded (24.4%). Most donors had never donated blood before (n = 1406), followed by lapsed donors (n = 1050), and recent donors (n = 951). There was a significant relationship between self-reported donation experience and fear of CCP donation (X²  = 119.2, p < .001). Motivations ranked "very important" by responding donors were wanting to help someone in need, a feeling of responsibility, and feeling a duty to donate. Donors with more severe disease were more likely to respond with feelings of a sense of duty to donate CCP (Χ²  = 8.078, p = .044) or altruism (Χ²  = 8.580, p = .035).

CONCLUSIONS

Overwhelmingly, altruism and a sense of duty and responsibility were the reasons that CCP donors decided to donate. These insights can be useful for motivating donors for specialized donation programs or if wide scale CCP recruitment is needed in the future.

Research participants recruited using online labor markets may feign medical conditions and overreport symptoms: Caveat emptor

OBJECTIVE

Over the last decade, the use of online labor markets to collect data in health science has grown exponentially. However, self-identification remains the most common method for recruiting specific clinical sub-populations, and this may adversely affect data validity among respondents motivated to feign a condition for financial gain.

METHODS

Online respondents who professed taking medication for a specific medical condition (sample 1: diabetes: N = 307; sample 2: pain: N = 506) were asked to upload an image of their prescribed medication. These images were then evaluated to identify authentic and inauthentic responders based on the images submitted. Authentic and inauthentic respondent groups were then compared on a series of condition-specific health measures and attention checks.

RESULTS

In the diabetes sample, respondents whose photos were deemed inauthentic passed fewer attention checks and reported poorer physical (e.g., number of comorbidities) and mental health (e.g., diabetes distress) across a wide variety of measures (η² = 0.014-0.159). Similarly in the pain sample, respondents whose photos were deemed inauthentic reported poorer physical (e.g., pain interference) and mental health (e.g., depression) across a wide variety of measures (η² = 0.008-0.129).

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings suggest that there may be substantial exaggeration of adverse health among online survey respondents who feign health conditions such as diabetes and chronic pain. Hence, in the absence of procedures to verify health status claims, the validity of data from online survey respondents should be viewed with skepticism.

Assessing the impact of an automated Web-based motivational interview on the intention and return behavior of Australian O-negative donors

BACKGROUND

O-negative donors are a critical resource for blood collection agencies, and their recruitment and retention provides an ongoing challenge. Motivational interviewing shows promise as a tool to promote donor retention, although concerns about scalability remain. The current study examined the effect of an automated Web-based interview drawing on motivational interviewing and self-determination theory on O-negative donors' motivation, intention, and behavior.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Within 13 days of donating, 2820 O-negative donors completed baseline measures of motivation and intention before being randomly assigned to complete either a motivational interview (MI) or active control interview (ACI). Motivation and intention were assessed at 2 days and at 7 weeks after participation in the MI or ACI, with return behavior tracked for 6 months following trial completion.

RESULTS

Changes in donor motivation and intention, rate, and time to return did not vary by participation in the MI or ACI. When compared with O-negative donors who experienced business-as-usual practices, donors completing the MI or ACI returned to donate more, and they returned more quickly. However, subsequent exploratory analyses considering the behavior of those who did not accept the invitation to participate and those who completed only baseline measures showed that the improved return behavior of donors in the MI or ACI conditions was likely not due to any specific properties of the MI or ACI activities.

CONCLUSIONS

Australian O-negative donors were highly internally motivated and committed to donating. An automated Web-based motivational interview appears to be of limited effectiveness in promoting the return of such donors.

Eligible blood donors' decisions about donating stool for fecal microbiota transplantation: Does ambivalence play a role?

Blood collection agencies (BCAs) are expanding core business by inviting blood donors to donate stool for fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT). However, whether blood donors also want to donate stool is unclear since, despite its benefits, stool donation is viewed by many as unpleasant. This study examined the prevalence, contributors to, and role of these mixed feelings (ambivalence) in stool donation intentions.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study surveyed Australian residents aged 18 years or more who believed themselves eligible to donate blood and met broad criteria for prescreening as a stool donor (eg, healthy, not taking medication). Survey questions assessed attitude, norms, self-efficacy, motives, disgust, ambivalence, and intentions to donate stool.

RESULTS

A total of 382 eligible blood donors aged not more than 50 years (mean, 28.71 years; 48% female, 62% "healthy" body mass index) participated. Six percent indicated no ambivalence about donating stool. In regression, significant determinants of ambivalence were less awareness of FMT, lower self-efficacy, motivated by ensuring that stool is available for loved ones, and more disgust about stool donation. Higher ambivalence contributed to decreased donation intention. Self-efficacy and disgust differentiated participants with moderate ambivalence, a group likely responsive to intervention, from those with low or high ambivalence.

CONCLUSION

Ambivalence about donating stool was common among eligible blood donors. BCAs should raise awareness about stool donation and FMT before requesting donation. BCAs may increase cost savings and donor retention by giving clear guidance about donation requirements and implementing processes that build confidence. Early screening of potential donors for ambivalence and disgust will enable BCAs to provide decision support.