A scoping review of sociology of voluntary blood donation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Maintaining stable blood supplies presents an increasing challenge for blood collection agencies (BCAs). Novel and multidisciplinary approaches and research have been called for to understand the mechanisms underlying the trends. The current body of sociological research on blood donation is a potentially valuable resource, but it is dispersed over different publications and theoretical frameworks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of sociological research on voluntary, non-remunerated blood donation to identify insights and practical applications for researchers and BCAs. RESULTS: Four organizing themes were identified: donated blood, blood donors, organizations and blood service systems. Key challenges associated with the organization of voluntary blood donation exist at the institutional and systems levels, and they may not be readily resolved by interventions focussed solely on the individual donor level. We identified opportunities for organizations to build trust with donors and the public through communications and working with communities to promote inclusion in blood donation. CONCLUSION: The results support a multidisciplinary approach and research for BCAs to move forward and find novel ways to ensure safe, resilient blood service systems.

Donor and non-donor perspectives on receiving information from routine genomic testing of donor blood.

BACKGROUND: Genomic testing is already used by blood collection agencies (BCAs) to identify rare blood types and ensure the best possible matching of blood. With ongoing technological developments, broader applications, such as the identification of genetic markers relevant to blood donor health, will become feasible. However, the perspectives of blood donors (and potential blood donors) on routine genomic testing of donor blood are under-researched. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Eight online Focus Groups were conducted: four with donors and four with non-donors. Participants were presented with three hypothetical scenarios about the current and possible future applications of genomic testing: Performing rare blood type testing; identifying donors with genetic markers associated with iron metabolism; and identifying donors with genetic markers associated with bowel cancer. RESULTS: Testing to identify rare blood types was perceived to be an appropriate application for the BCA to undertake, while identifying markers associated with iron metabolism and cancer genetic markers were only partially supported. Participants raised concerns about the boundaries of acceptable testing and the implications of testing for privacy, data security, and health insurance. Perspectives of donors and non-donors on all scenarios were similar. DISCUSSION: The principles of who benefits from genomic testing and the perceived role of BCAs were key in shaping participants' perspectives. Participants generally agreed that testing should be directly related to blood donation or be of benefit to the recipient or donor. Findings indicate that consent and communication are key to the acceptability of current and expanded genomic testing.

Blood donors' preferences for blood donation for biomedical research.

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of blood donors are recruited to participate in biomedical research. As blood services depend on voluntary donors, successful recruitment calls for a better understanding of donors' expectations and attitudes toward the use of samples in research. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Sixty-one semistructured interviews were conducted with blood donors at eight Finnish Red Cross Blood Service donation sites in Finland. The 10- to 30-minute interviews included open-ended questions about donors' views on blood donation for patients and for biomedical research. Central motives to donate blood for patients were identified against which views on research use were compared to see how these reflections differed. RESULTS: Six central motives for donating blood for patients were identified among donors. The interviewees were, in general, willing to donate blood for research, but considered research donation more likely if it could be easily integrated into their usual blood donation habits. Biomedical research was perceived as important but its social benefits were more abstract than a direct help to patients. CONCLUSIONS: Familiarity and reciprocity were key to the relationship between the blood service and blood donors. Donation for research introduces a new, more complex context to blood donation. Challenge to recognize concrete outcomes and benefits of donation may affect willingness to donate for research. Transparent communication of the role of the blood service in research and of the beneficiaries of the research is essential in maintaining trust. These results will help blood services in their planning to recruit blood donors for research projects.

Attitudes of blood donors to their sample and data donation for biobanking.

Modern biomedical and genetic studies require large study cohorts; blood donors have been suggested to represent an appropriate group for recruiting healthy cohorts. The Blood Service Biobank (BSB) in Finland was recently established to recruit blood donors willing to give broad biobank consent. The aim of the present study is to understand how the blood bank context influences views on donating samples and health data. We organised 61 interviews and 10 group discussions with current and potential blood donors. Using qualitative content analysis, we identified three discussion frameworks that summarise the results. We found that frequent blood donors associated the voluntary act of donation with caring for patients. The blood donation experience was considered to accommodate biobank participation, but also allowed critical observations on the integration of research data collection into blood donation. Research participants identified an important difference between the blood bank and biobank contexts. In the biobank context, the focus shifts from donating blood to patients into donating personal and genetic data for research use. Blood donors' anxiety over data use was balanced with their experience of the trustworthiness of the Blood Service. These experiences indicated that the new biobanking activity could be trusted to a familiar organisation. To build donors' trust, biobanks should invest in their institutional reputation, donor experience and dialogue with donors. These findings can be applied to other institutions that are considering setting up biobanks with broad consent for personal data use.