Motivational factors for blood donation in first-time donors and repeat donors: a cross-sectional study in West Pomerania.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to analyse motivational factors for blood donation in different donor groups. BACKGROUND: As the demographic change will result in a decrease of the population in age groups of blood donors, the risk of blood product shortage increases. METHODS: During a 12-month period, every sixth blood donor presenting at the blood donation centre of the University Hospital was asked to complete a self-administered questionnaire assessing motivational factors for blood donation. Despite the formalised enrolment protocol, frequent donors were over-represented in the study cohort, which was adjusted by weighting donors with different numbers of donations per year in such a way that the distribution of numbers of donations per year was the same in the sample as in the donor population. RESULTS: Of 2443 participants, 14·3% were first-time and 85·3% repeat donors. To "help other people" (>90%) and receiving "medical assessment of my blood values" (63-69%) were the strongest motivational factors in all donor groups. Receiving remuneration (49·2% vs 38·1%) was more important for repeat donors than for first-time donors, whereas it was the opposite for "being taken by a friend to the donor clinic" (47·0% vs 15·5%). A potentially important observation is that 33·9% of frequent donors reported feeling physically better after blood donation compared to infrequent donors (29·5%). CONCLUSION: Identification of motivational factors can lead to the design of targeted motivation campaigns for blood donation. The underlying cause of the perceived well-being after blood donation requires further studies.

Factors influencing confidential unit exclusions in blood donors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In many countries blood donors can exclude their donated blood from being transfused in a confidential unit exclusion (CUE) process. We aimed to identify characteristics which might influence the decision for CUE. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In a 3-step approach we first enrolled 29 German blood donation centers in 2005 and addressed how the clarity of different CUE forms applied in these centers was rated by first time blood donors and also assessed three newly designed CUE forms. Second, we performed a survey on the characteristics of the CUE process including 25 centers. Third, we performed an intervention study, in which the CUE form originally applied in the study centre was compared with a newly developed CUE form in a before-after study design with respect to the corresponding CUE rates. RESULTS: (1) Clarity of the CUE forms varied considerably. (2) The CUE rate was higher (P < 0.05) when nurses rather than a physician were involved in informing the donors and when the CUE form was submitted anonymously instead of being handed to a person. (3) Application of the newly designed CUE form which was rated as being very clear resulted in a 31% decrease in the CUE rate. CONCLUSIONS: Design of the CUE form and characteristics of the CUE process may considerably influence the CUE rates.

Item reduction of the voice handicap index based on the original version and on European translations.

OBJECTIVE: Constructing an internationally applicable short-scale of the Voice Handicap Index (VHI). METHODS: Subjects were 1,052 patients with 5 different types of voice disorder groups from Belgium, France, Sweden, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, and the USA. Different 9- and 12-item subsets were selected from the 30 VHI items using (1) the first factor of an unrotated factor analysis (narrow range subsets) and (2) the first three factors after promax rotation (broad range subsets). Country-specific subsets were selected to test deviations from the international subsets. For all subsets, reliability was investigated using Cronbach's alphas and correlations with the total VHI. Validity was investigated using regression on voice disorder groups. All analyses were performed for the total and for all country-specific subject samples. RESULTS: Reliability was high for all item subsets. It was lower for the international compared to the country-specific subsets and for the broad range compared to the narrow range subsets. Validity was best for the broad range subsets. Validity was better for the international than for the country-specific subsets. For all statistics the 12-item subsets were not essentially better than the 9-item subsets. CONCLUSION: The international broad range 9-item subset forms a scale which approximates well the total VHI.

[School-based smoking prevention by enhancement of life competence--an empirical evaluation]. / Innerschulische Prävention des Rauchens durch Lebenskompetenzförderung--eine empirische Evaluation.

AIM OF THE STUDY: An intervention for the prevention of smoking in fifth grades of basic secondary schools is to be evaluated. METHOD: A non-randomised control group study was performed. The intervention-group consisted of 21 classes from 9 secondary schools of the County of Neuss, the control group of 34 classes from 12 schools of the counties of Neuss and Erft. The intervention consisted of up to 12 teaching units in one academic year with the goal of giving smoking-relevant information and of strengthening social competences. Before and after the intervention, pupils in both study groups answered questionnaires anonymously. The questions focussed on smoking behaviour in the previous four weeks (smoking frequency) and, limited to pupils who had never smoked before in the first interview (never-before-smokers), on the start of smoking. RESULTS: A total of 1,082 pupils participated in both interviews (intervention: 462; control: 620). Smoking frequency increased more within the intervention group than in the control group (p < 0.05). In the intervention group more never-before-smokers started smoking than in the control group (12.7% versus 7.8%; p < 0.05). After statistical control of age, sex, nationality, smoking status of relatives and the interaction of these variables with the intervention, both effects are no longer statistically significant. Instead another result is emerging: for pupils with a smoking father, smoking frequency in the intervention group increases significantly less than in the control group (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The intervention had no general effect for all pupils. However, it did have a positive effect specifically for pupils with a smoking father. The whole intervention does not seem to be cost-effective. Specific interventions with a focus on endangered groups could be more cost-effective.