Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Safety and protection of plasma donors: A scoping review and evidence gap map.
Schroyens, Natalie; D'aes, Tine; De Buck, Emmy; Mikkelsen, Susan; Tiberghien, Pierre; van den Hurk, Katja; Erikstrup, Christian; Compernolle, Veerle; Van Remoortel, Hans.
Afiliação
  • Schroyens N; Centre for Evidence-Based Practice, Belgian Red Cross, Mechelen, Belgium.
  • D'aes T; Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
  • De Buck E; Centre for Evidence-Based Practice, Belgian Red Cross, Mechelen, Belgium.
  • Mikkelsen S; Centre for Evidence-Based Practice, Belgian Red Cross, Mechelen, Belgium.
  • Tiberghien P; Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
  • van den Hurk K; Department of Clinical Immunology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Erikstrup C; Etablissement Français du Sang, Saint-Denis, France.
  • Compernolle V; Université de Franche-Comté, EFS, INSERM, UMR Right, Besançon, France.
  • Van Remoortel H; Donor Medicine Research - Donor Studies, Sanquin Research, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Vox Sang ; 119(2): 110-120, 2024 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37814964
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND

OBJECTIVES:

As part of a large-scale project to safely increase plasma collection in Europe, the current scoping review identifies the existing evidence (gaps) on adverse events (AEs) and other health effects in plasmapheresis donors, as well as factors that may be associated with such events/effects. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

We searched six databases and three registries. Study characteristics (publication type, language, study design, population, outcomes, associated factors, time of assessment, duration of follow-up, number and frequency of donations, convalescent plasma [y/n], setting and location) were synthesized narratively and in an interactive evidence gap map (EGM).

RESULTS:

Ninety-four research articles and five registrations were identified. Around 90% were observational studies (57 controlled and 33 uncontrolled), and most of them were performed in Europe (55%) or the United States (20%). Factors studied in association with donor health included donor characteristics (e.g., sex, age) (n = 27), cumulative number of donations (n = 21), donation frequency (n = 11), plasma collection device or programme (n = 11), donor status (first time vs. repeat) (n = 10), donation volume per session (n = 8), time in donation programme (n = 3), preventive measures (n = 2) or other (n = 9).

CONCLUSION:

The current scoping review provides an accessible tool for researchers and policymakers to identify the available evidence (gaps) concerning plasmapheresis donation safety. Controlled prospective studies with long-term donor follow-up are scarce. Furthermore, additional experimental studies comparing the health effects of different donation frequencies are required to inform a safe upper limit for donation frequency.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Plasmaferese / Lacunas de Evidências Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Plasmaferese / Lacunas de Evidências Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article