Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Deferral rate variability in blood donor eligibility assessment.
de Kort, Wim; Prinsze, Femmeke; Nuboer, Glenn; Twisk, Jos; Merz, Eva-Maria.
Affiliation
  • de Kort W; Research Division, Donor Studies Department, Sanquin Blood Supply, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Prinsze F; Academic Medical Center, Public Health Department, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Nuboer G; Research Division, Donor Studies Department, Sanquin Blood Supply, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Twisk J; Blood Bank Division, Medical Services Department, Sanquin Blood Supply, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Merz EM; Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, Vrije Universiteit Medical Center (VUmc), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Transfusion ; 59(1): 242-249, 2019 01.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30414176
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Both donors and the blood bank rely on the result of the donor health interview. However, survey data suggest that substantial variability in deferral rates among interviewers exist. We studied whether variability remained after adjusting for conditional factors. STUDY DESIGN AND

METHODS:

The data set included Dutch interview data on whole blood donor visits in 2015, where one of their visits was selected randomly. We applied logistic regression and multilevel regression analyses with the donor visit, with the interviewer representing the levels. We set up four models 1) all reasons deferral, 2) low-hemoglobin-level deferral, 3) infectious disease risk deferral and 4) other medical reasons deferral.

RESULTS:

In total, 138,398 visits were included in the study, of which 60,534 (43.7%) related to male donors. The overall deferral rate for men was 7.91% and for women 12.25%. Deferral rates among interviewers ranged from as low as 1.19% up to 28.8%. Models 2 (low hemoglobin level) and particularly 4 (other medical reasons), for both men and women, showed significant intraclass correlation coefficients, implying considerable deferral rate variability among interviewers. Donor age, the number of previous visits, and the season had relatively large effects. However, explained variances of the logistic regression models were relatively low, ranging from 2.53% to 7.35%.

CONCLUSION:

Deferral appears to be a random process, while substantial variability was found among interviewer deferral rates, suggesting that some interviewers are more cautious than others. Our results suggest heuristic and subjective diagnosing to be prevalent. Steps should be taken to improve interview result validity.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Blood Donors Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Year: 2019 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Blood Donors Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Year: 2019 Type: Article