Trends in return behavior after an adverse event in Australian whole blood and plasma donors

Impact of Sample Type on D-Dimer Screening

Background

The quality of laboratory test results depends on various factors, including sample type selection. Blood samples, such as whole blood, plasma and serum are commonly used for most clinical laboratory examinations. D-dimer parameters are frequently analysed in haematology laboratories and serve as biomarkers for coagulation activation and fibrinolysis. This study aimed to assess the impact of using different sample types on the quality of D-dimer test results.

Method

An observational analytical method was used. D-dimer examination was performed using the fluorescent lateral flow immunoassay method. The study sample consisted of 26 participants aged between 18 years old and 22 years old who had no blood disorders. Whole blood and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) plasma samples were used for the examination of D-dimer levels.

Results

D-dimer levels in 26 participants using whole blood samples had a mean value of 0.23 mg/L (230 ng/mL), while plasma samples yielded a mean value of 0.14 mg/L (140 ng/mL). D-dimer levels obtained from whole blood samples were higher than plasma samples but remained within the normal range of 0 mg/L-0.5 mg/L (0 ng/mL-500 ng/mL).

Conclusion

The results showed that whole blood samples were more practical than plasma samples. Nevertheless, plasma samples gave results within the normal range of D-dimer values.

Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting the risk of vasovagal reactions after plasma donation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Vasovagal reactions (VVRs) are the most common adverse reactions and are frequently associated with serious donor adverse events. Even mild VVRs can lead to a significant reduction in the likelihood of subsequent donations. The purpose of this study is to explore the factors related to the occurrence of VVRs after plasma donation and to construct a nomogram to identify individuals at risk for VVRs to improve the safety of plasma donors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected the donation data from July 2019 to June 2020 from a plasma center in Sichuan, China, to explore the independent risk factors for vasovagal reactions. From these data, we constructed and validated a predictive model for vasovagal reactions.

RESULTS

VVRs after plasma donation occurred 737 times in 120 448 plasma donations (0.66%). Gender, season, donor status, weight, pulse, duration of donation, and cycle were independent risk factors for VVRs (P< 0.05). The concordance index (C-index) of a logistic model in the derivation cohort was 0.916, with a Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit probability of 0.795. The C-index of a logistic model in the validation cohort was 0.916, with a Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit probability of 0.224. The calibration curve showed that the predicted results were in good agreement with the actual observed results.

CONCLUSION

This study preliminarily constructed and verified a prediction model for VVRs after plasma donation. The model nomogram is practical and can identify high-risk donors.

What influences decisions to donate plasma? A rapid review of the literature

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Plasma has become an essential ingredient for various medical treatments. Many blood collection agencies rely on voluntary non-remunerated donation when collecting plasma, but at present many do not collect sufficient plasma to meet domestic demands. This rapid review sought to explore the factors that have been found to influence people's decisions to donate plasma to inform future research.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, Social Sciences Citation Index and CINAHL for peer-reviewed journal articles that discussed plasma donation and the factors associated with donor behaviour. Pertinent information from included articles was extracted and arranged in themes.

RESULTS

In total, 33 articles were included in this review. Three main themes were identified by the authors. The first focused on site-level factors related to blood collection agencies' engagement with plasma donors and their influence on plasma donation experiences. The second theme considered how individual characteristics and experiences influence willingness to donate plasma. The third theme examined social and cultural-level factors, such as how social networks and community shape perceptions and experiences with donation.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that the current understanding of plasma donation is focused mainly on converting whole blood donors and also centres on individual-level factors to donation. Further research must examine what factors attract non-whole blood donors to become plasma donors, focusing on broader social-level influences. This review will inform policies and interventions for blood collection agencies to increase plasma donors.

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.

Experiences of knowledge translation among researchers in transfusion medicine: Findings from an international survey study

BACKGROUND

Translation of research knowledge is critical to ensure transfusion medicine policies and practices reflect current evidence and so effectively support the health of blood donors and recipients, as well as ensuring ongoing blood supply. The aim of this study was to investigate the barriers and facilitators of knowledge translation (KT) among transfusion medicine researchers and determine what KT supports are needed.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

An anonymous, cross-sectional survey was distributed by emailing corresponding authors of papers in four major blood journals, emailing grant recipients in the area of transfusion medicine, posting on social media, and through an international blood operator network.

RESULTS

The final sample included 105 researchers. Participants had a positive orientation toward KT, with few perceiving KT as not relevant to their research or beneficial for their careers. However, many reported facing difficulties practicing KT due to time constraints, competing priorities, or lack of funds or resources. Fostering relationships with stakeholders was seen as a key facilitator of KT but a number of researchers expressed difficulties engaging and communicating with them. Collaboration opportunities, protected time for KT, and access to KT resources were some of the supports researchers felt were required to help their KT efforts.

CONCLUSION

To minimize the knowledge to practice gap in transfusion medicine and ensure findings from research lead to improved outcomes, organizations need to support researchers in their KT efforts and facilitate interactions between researchers and research end-users.

Novel risk patterns of vasovagal reactions in NZ blood donations complicated by COVID-19 restrictions

Introduction

Vasovagal reactions (VVRs) are common but complex donor adverse reactions (DAEs) in blood donations. VVRs have been extensively studied with a multitude of risk factors identified including young age, female gender and first-time donor status. How they may interplay remains obscure.

Methods

A total of 1,984,116 blood donations and 27,952 immediate VVRs (iVVRs) and 1,365 delayed VVRs (dVVRs) reported between 2011 and 2021 in NZ were used in multivariate logistic regression analyses each concerning donations with iVVRs as cases and those free of DAEs as controls. For each analysis stepwise selection was used to identify the best model and risk factors carrying significant main effects and/or interactions. Identified interactions informed further in-depth regression analyses to dissect iVVR risk patterns.

Results

Over 95% of VVRs were iVVRs that had lower female preponderance and deferrals than dVVRs. iVVRs had a school seasonal pattern in whole blood donations driven by first-time donors from schools/colleges, and interactions between gender and age group differentiating the first-time from repeat donations. Subsequent regression analyses identified the known and novel risk factors of year and mobile collection sites and their interactions. iVVR rates were roundly elevated in 2020 and 2021 probably because of COVID-19 restrictions like facemask wearing. Exclusion of the 2020 and 2021 data removed the interactions with year, but confirmed interactions of gender with mobile collection sites (p = 6.2e-07) in first-time donations only and with age group in repeat donations only (p < 2.2e-16), together indicating young female donors at the highest risk of iVVRs. Our results also revealed that donation policy changes contributed to the year effects; donors had a lower iVVR risk at mobile sites than well-medicalized donation centers probably because of under-reporting.

Conclusion

Modeling statistical interactions is valuable in identifying odds and revealing novel iVVR risk patterns and insights into blood donations.

Prevention of Blood Donation-related Vasovagal Response by Applied Muscle Tension: a Meta-analysis

Objective

Vasovagal reaction (VVR) is an adverse reaction to blood donation. Applied muscle tension (AMT) has been reported to reduce the probability of VVR during blood donation; however, the results have been controversial. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate the effect of AMT in reducing VVR.

Methods

We searched six major databases using “applied muscle tension” and “blood donation-related vasovagal response” as keywords. Relevant articles published in English or Chinese between 1 January 2000 and 30 June 2021 were included in the analysis. The quality of the included articles was evaluated and publication bias was assessed by forest and funnel plots and by Egger's test.

Results

Fifty-one articles were identified, of which six were included according to the pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A fixed-effects model was adopted for effect size combination and revealed a relative risk of 0.52 (95% confidence interval 0.40 to 0.67). The AMT group was superior to the control in terms of VVR prevention. A funnel plot and Egger's test suggested that the findings were accurate and reliable with low publication bias.

Conclusion

AMT could effectively reduce VVR during blood donation. Further multicenter studies with large sample sizes are needed to confirm these results.

Using the Health Action Process Approach to predict blood donation intentions and return behavior following a vasovagal reaction for whole blood and plasma donors

BACKGROUND

To inform the development of interventions to retain donors following a vasovagal reaction (VVR), the aim of this study is to use the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) to identify predictors of intentions to re-donate and actual return behavior among whole blood (WB) and plasma donors who experienced a VVR.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A total of 1136 WB donors (M_age  = 32.4 ± 12.5 years; 73.4% female) and 1141 plasma donors (M_age  = 36.5 ± 14.4 years; 73.3% female) completed an online survey after experiencing a VVR. Two hierarchical regression analyses were conducted for each donation type. In the first analysis, donation intentions were regressed onto the motivational HAPA constructs and social support. In the second analysis, donor return within 6 months was regressed onto social support, intentions, and the volitional HAPA constructs.

RESULTS

The motivational and social support variables accounted for 47.2% of the variance in intentions to return in WB donors and 15.7% in plasma donors. For both groups, task self-efficacy, positive and negative outcome expectancies, and social support were significant predictors of intentions to return. Intentions and action planning were significant predictors of donor return in both groups, and recovery self-efficacy was significant for plasma only.

CONCLUSION

The HAPA model can provide guidance to blood collection agencies to design phase-specific and individually-focused interventions to retain WB and plasma donors following a VVR.

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.

Improving donor retention following a temporary deferral: A cluster randomized controlled trial of deferral educational materials

BACKGROUND

Providing educational materials to deferred donors has been shown to increase their understanding about their deferral and knowledge about their return. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of educational materials in increasing the retention of deferred donors.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A three-arm cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted, with the following conditions: (a) Incenter Brochure plus Email; (b) Email Only; (c) Control. The Incenter Brochure plus Email condition also included a guided conversation led by staff at the point of deferral. Donors were followed up for 3 months after their deferral had ended to determine if they had attempted to donate.

RESULTS

Compared with the Control condition, donors in the Incenter Brochure plus Email condition had increased odds of return at 3 months after their deferral ended (OR: 1.16; 95% CI 1.00-1.33). Subgroup analysis highlighted that novice (OR: 1.38; 95% CI 1.04-1.83) and established donors (OR: 1.36; 95% CI 1.13-1.64) had increased odds of return if they received the incenter materials. Donors who were deferred to maintain their well-being (OR: 1.28; 95% CI 1.03-1.60) and donors with a prior deferral history (OR: 1.55; 95% CI 1.15-1.55) had increased odds of return if they received the incenter materials. No significant differences were found between the Email Only and Control conditions.

DISCUSSION

This trial demonstrates the benefits of providing onsite educational materials to donors at the point of deferral. This is a simple, effective strategy to increase the return behavior of donors within 3 months of their deferral ending.

An intervention study for the prevention of vasovagal reactions and evaluating donors' experience: Analysis of donors' return for subsequent donation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The EPISoDe (Experience Success in Donation) study investigated the effect of interventions on self-reported vasovagal reactions (VVRs) in first-time and novice (second to fourth donation) whole blood donors aged ≤30 years, demonstrating a 23% reduction of VVR from water drinking shortly before donation in the novice donors. Because donation experience and complications affect donor retention, we analysed intervention group donors' return for subsequent donation, a predefined secondary outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The interventions were as follows: 330 ml water, 500 ml water, ball squeezing before phlebotomy (placebo) and a control group. All donors received an online questionnaire about their experience within a week after donation. In the Netherlands, eligible donors are invited at least yearly depending on hospitals' needs. We analysed attendances within 421 days through return percentages and binomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 8300 EPISoDe participants, 6538 (78.8%) returned within 421 days. Return did not differ between the two water groups, whereas odds for return were significantly higher in both water and placebo intervention donors compared to the control group (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.29 and 1.22, 1.05-1.43, respectively) after adjustment for occurrence of VVR, unsuccessful collection, gender and donation history. Staff-recorded or self-reported VVR at index donation was associated with reduced odds for return (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.37-0.60 and OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.46-0.61, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of younger inexperienced blood donors, 78.8% returned for subsequent donation. Donors who received an active study intervention, either water or placebo, were more likely to return than control group donors.

Effects of message framing on recruiting Rh-D-negative blood donors in an emergency situation: Two randomized trials

OBJECTIVES

Prospect theory categorizes message framing according to whether it emphasizes a possible loss or a possible gain. Promotions of blood donation worldwide mainly focus on gain-framed appeal. The objective of the current study is to examine the effects of message framing on recruiting Rh-D-negative blood donors (RDNBDs) in an emergency situation.

DESIGN

Two randomized trials.

METHODS

In Study 1, 813 group O and 500 group B RDNBDs were randomly assigned to three groups receiving three different recruitment text messages: (1) gain-framed, (2) loss-framed, and (3) information messages. In addition, 613 group A and 148 group AB RDNBDs were marked as (4) no message group. In Study 2, 758 RDNBDs were randomly provided one of two versions of materials focusing on either the possible survival (gain-framed) or the death (loss-framed) of a Rh-D-negative patient needed a blood transfusion. These participants then completed a questionnaire to examine the possible mechanisms underlying the observed effects.

RESULTS

Compared to not receiving any message, significantly more RDNBDs re-donated within 14 days after they received a loss-framed message. Study 2 found that RDNBDs who read the loss-framed material expressed more willingness to donate immediately than those who read the gain-framed material. RDNBDs with high-risk perception expressed a greater blood donation intention in the loss-framed group. The loss-framed message made participants perceive others' needs more strongly, which generated more empathy, and thus increased blood donation intention.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggested that recruiting RDNBDs using a loss-framed message is suitable under an emergency.

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.

Improving the donation experience and reducing venipuncture pain by addressing fears among whole-blood and plasma donors

BACKGROUND

Fear of blood donation is implicated in vasovagal reactions, donor recruitment, and retention. This study examined the extent to which fear among donors is associated with various donor outcomes in an Australian sample, and whether fear can be addressed on-site to reduce adverse reactions and improve the donation experience.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Six hundred and sixty-four donors (age M = 33.4, SD = 12.7; 55% female) participated in a two-center, pragmatic, parallel group, individually randomized controlled trial. Following donor registration and consent, whole-blood (n = 539) and plasma (n = 125) donors were assigned to one of four Conditions: control; fear assessment; fear assessment + brochure; fear assessment + brochure + tailored conversation focused on any self-reported fear and coping strategies. Post-donation questionnaires assessed the donors' experience including positive support, donor self-efficacy, anxiety, fear, venipuncture pain, and vasovagal reactions.

RESULTS

Fear among donors predicted higher venipuncture pain, post-donation anxiety, and vasovagal reactions and remained significant after controlling for other established predictors (i.e., total estimated blood volume, age, sex, and donation experience). Mediational analyses showed that exposure to brochures (with or without the tailored conversation) was associated with less pain, with this effect mediated by donor perceptions of more positive support. Venipuncture pain was also associated with vasovagal reactions, reduced likelihood of return within 6 months, and less satisfaction with the donation experience.

CONCLUSION

The current results underline the importance of interventions to address fear among both whole-blood and plasma donors to secure the safety and well-being of donors and the blood supply.

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.

Long-term return and donation pattern of those who begin donating at different ages: A retrospective cohort analysis of blood donors in Australia

BACKGROUND

This study compared the likelihood of return to donate and donation rate ratio by age of donors at their first donation when followed up to 12 years.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Donation history of two cohorts of first-time donors (those donating in 2007 and 2013) was extracted until March 2019 from Australian Red Cross Lifeblood's national database. Poisson regression analyses compared donor return and negative-binomial regression estimated the rate ratio of donations.

RESULTS

A total of 120 469 and 95 381 donors were included in the 2007 and 2013 cohorts, respectively. Compared to donors aged 20-24 years, the likelihood of return in both cohorts increased consistently as age at first donation increased from 30-years and above. Average number of whole-blood and plasmapheresis donations increased as the age at first donation increased from 30-years onward. The whole-blood donation rate was highest for donors ≥60 years, while plasmapheresis donation rate was highest for donors aged 50-59 years. These patterns were largely consistent when stratified by sex.

CONCLUSIONS

To continuously ensure the short- to mid-term sufficiency of blood supply in Australia, targeted recruitment of donors aged 30-years and above may be considered, however its feasibility and impact should be explored further given relatively smaller proportion of new donors are middle-aged and older under current policies. Future studies with a longer follow-up period are needed to examine whether the frequency of donation among those who start donating at a younger age increases later in their life when they are 30-years or over.

Endoscopies, blood-borne viruses and blood donors: time to move on from precaution

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Based on the Council of Europe directive which dictates regulatory requirements in Australia, blood donors are currently deferred from donating for 4 months after an endoscopic procedure if either polyps were removed or a biopsy sample was taken. We aimed to assess the incidence of blood-borne viruses (BBVs) (HIV, hepatitis B and C) in blood donors who donated after an endoscopic procedure and evaluate the risk to blood safety through risk modelling.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Donors from 1/1/2013 to 31/12/2017 with an endoscopy deferral on their blood donor file with pre- and post-BBV testing were analysed to determine an incidence of BBVs using standard methods. The standard blood donor cohort was used as a comparator group. Using the incidence of endoscopies and BBV risk, the total residual risk estimate of allowing donors to return postendoscopy without restriction was calculated.

RESULTS

The incidence of a BBV postendoscopy in this large cohort of 16,283 where testing has been confirmed postendoscopy was zero (95% CI 0-0·000105). The upper confidence interval of the zero events is 10·5 per 100 000 donations. Total positive donations from 2017 repeat donors were 1·87 per 100 000 (95% CI 0·0000117-0·0000277). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the residual risk remained negligible under realistic worst-case scenarios.

CONCLUSION

A BBV endoscopy deferral is not required for blood safety in Australia. The presented data has enabled us to submit a request for an exemption to our regulator, which has been approved and the policy change subsequently implemented by Lifeblood on 4/4/2020.