Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant ; 22(3): 520-7, 2016 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26597080

RESUMO

Recent investigations have found a higher incidence of adverse events associated with hematopoietic cell donation in related donors (RDs) who have morbidities that if present in an unrelated donor (UD) would preclude donation. In the UD setting, regulatory standards ensure independent assessment of donors, one of several crucial measures to safeguard donor health and safety. A survey conducted by the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) Donor Health and Safety Working Committee in 2007 reported a potential conflict of interest in >70% of US centers, where physicians had simultaneous responsibility for RDs and their recipients. Consequently, several international organizations have endeavored to improve practice through regulations and consensus recommendations. We hypothesized that the changes in the 2012 Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy and the Joint Accreditation Committee-International Society for Cellular Therapy and European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation standards resulting from the CIBMTR study would have significantly impacted practice. Accordingly, we conducted a follow-up survey of US transplantation centers to assess practice changes since 2007, and to investigate additional areas where RD care was predicted to differ from UD care. A total of 73 centers (53%), performing 79% of RD transplantations in the United States, responded. Significant improvements were observed since the earlier survey; 62% centers now ensure separation of RD and recipient care (P < .0001). This study identifies several areas where RD management does not meet international donor care standards, however. Particular concerns include counseling and assessment of donors before HLA typing, with 61% centers first disclosing donor HLA results to an individual other than the donor, the use of unlicensed mobilization agents, and the absence of long-term donor follow-up. Recommendations for improvement are made.


Assuntos
Fidelidade a Diretrizes/normas , Hospitais Especializados/normas , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Doadores de Tecidos , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos
2.
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant ; 22(3): 514-9, 2016 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26597079

RESUMO

Previous studies have identified healthcare practices that may place undue pressure on related donors (RDs) of hematopoietic cell products and an increase in serious adverse events associated with morbidities in this population. As a result, specific requirements to safeguard RD health have been introduced to Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy/The Joint Accreditation Committee ISCT and EBMT (FACT-JACIE) Standards, but the impact of accreditation on RD care has not previously been evaluated. A survey of transplant program directors of European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation member centers was conducted by the Donor Health and Safety Working Committee of the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research to test the hypothesis that RD care in FACT-JACIE accredited centers is more closely aligned with international consensus donor care recommendations than RD care delivered in centers without accreditation. Responses were received from 39% of 304 centers. Our results show that practice in accredited centers was much closer to recommended standards as compared with nonaccredited centers. Specifically, a higher percentage of accredited centers use eligibility criteria to assess RDs (93% versus 78%; P = .02), and a lower percentage have a single physician simultaneously responsible for an RD and their recipient (14% versus 35%; P = .008). In contrast, where regulatory standards do not exist, both accredited and nonaccredited centers fell short of accepted best practice. These results raise concerns that despite improvements in care, current practice can place undue pressure on donors and may increase the risk of donation-associated adverse events. We recommend measures to address these issues through enhancement of regulatory standards as well as national initiatives to standardize RD care.


Assuntos
Acreditação/normas , Seleção do Doador/normas , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/normas , Doadores não Relacionados , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/normas , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA