Cost-effectiveness of alternative minimum recall intervals between whole blood donations
The INTERVAL trial showed shorter inter-donation intervals could safely increase the frequency of whole-blood donation. We extended the INTERVAL trial to consider the relative cost-effectiveness of reduced inter-donation intervals. Our within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) used data from 44...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2022-08, Vol.17 (8), p.e0272854 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 8 |
| container_start_page | e0272854 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 17 |
| creator | Sadique, Zia Willis, Sarah Corte, Kaat De Pennington, Mark Moore, Carmel Kaptoge, Stephen Angelantonio, Emanuele Di Miflin, Gail Roberts, David J Grieve, Richard |
| description | The INTERVAL trial showed shorter inter-donation intervals could safely increase the frequency of whole-blood donation. We extended the INTERVAL trial to consider the relative cost-effectiveness of reduced inter-donation intervals.
Our within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) used data from 44,863 whole-blood donors randomly assigned to 12, 10 or 8 week (males), and 16, 14 or 12 week inter-donation intervals (females). The CEA analysed the number of whole-blood donations, deferrals including low- haemoglobin deferrals, and donors' health-related quality of life (QoL) to report costs and cost-effectiveness over two years.
The mean number of blood donation visits over two years was higher for the reduced interval strategies, for males (7.76, 6.60 and 5.68 average donations in the 8-, 10- and 12- week arms) and for females (5.10, 4.60 and 4.01 donations in the 12-, 14- and 16- week arms). For males, the average rate of deferral for low haemoglobin per session attended, was 5.71% (8- week arm), 3.73% (10- week), and 2.55% (12- week), and for females the rates were: 7.92% (12-week), 6.63% (14- week), and 5.05% (16- week). Donors' QoL was similar across strategies, although self-reported symptoms were increased with shorter donation intervals. The shorter interval strategies increased average cost, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £9.51 (95% CI 9.33 to 9.69) per additional whole-blood donation for the 8- versus 12- week interval for males, and £10.17 (95% CI 9.80 to 10.54) for the 12- versus 16- week interval arm for females.
Over two years, reducing the minimum donation interval could provide additional units of whole-blood at a small additional cost, including for those donor subgroups whose blood type is in relatively high demand. However, the significance of self-reported symptoms needs to be investigated further before these policies are expanded. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0272854 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2703383809</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A714155786</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_709d477a9bdd4ba78ed1d12b4b260966</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A714155786</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-a99cc37324ba283832fee5ef2db9b796553f0b85679bae25c0398283ac1812b13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk12L1DAUhoso7rr6D0QLgujFjPlomuRGWAY_BhYW_MK7kCanMxnSZm3aWf33pjvdZSp7Ib1oOXne95ycnpNlzzFaYsrxu10Yulb75VVoYYkIJ4IVD7JTLClZlATRh0ffJ9mTGHcIMSrK8nF2QpnkpWTyNPu5CrFfQF2D6d0eWogxD3WufQ_JfQzljWtdMzR5B0Z7n7s2He21j3kF_TVAm19vg4e88iHY3IZRFdr4NHtUJwieTe-z7PvHD99WnxcXl5_Wq_OLhSkl6RdaSmMop6SoNBFUUFIDMKiJrWTFZckYrVElWMllpYEwg6gUCdQGC0wqTM-ylwffKx-impoSFeGIJjeBZCLWB8IGvVNXnWt090cF7dRNIHQbpbveGQ-KI2kLzrWsrE0FcQEW25SmqEiJZFkmr_dTtqFqwBpo-077men8pHVbtQl7JakopBjLfTMZdOHXALFXjYsGvNcthOFQd4FLjkhCX_2D3n-7idrodAHX1iHlNaOpOue4wIxxMda9vIdKj4XGmTRBtUvxmeDtTJCYHn73Gz3EqNZfv_w_e_ljzr4-YreQBm0bgx9uZmYOFgfQdCHGDuq7JmOkxgW47YYaF0BNC5BkL45_0J3oduLpXxmGAPI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2703383809</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost-effectiveness of alternative minimum recall intervals between whole blood donations</title><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Sadique, Zia ; Willis, Sarah ; Corte, Kaat De ; Pennington, Mark ; Moore, Carmel ; Kaptoge, Stephen ; Angelantonio, Emanuele Di ; Miflin, Gail ; Roberts, David J ; Grieve, Richard</creator><contributor>Tischer, Thomas</contributor><creatorcontrib>Sadique, Zia ; Willis, Sarah ; Corte, Kaat De ; Pennington, Mark ; Moore, Carmel ; Kaptoge, Stephen ; Angelantonio, Emanuele Di ; Miflin, Gail ; Roberts, David J ; Grieve, Richard ; Tischer, Thomas</creatorcontrib><description>The INTERVAL trial showed shorter inter-donation intervals could safely increase the frequency of whole-blood donation. We extended the INTERVAL trial to consider the relative cost-effectiveness of reduced inter-donation intervals.
Our within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) used data from 44,863 whole-blood donors randomly assigned to 12, 10 or 8 week (males), and 16, 14 or 12 week inter-donation intervals (females). The CEA analysed the number of whole-blood donations, deferrals including low- haemoglobin deferrals, and donors' health-related quality of life (QoL) to report costs and cost-effectiveness over two years.
The mean number of blood donation visits over two years was higher for the reduced interval strategies, for males (7.76, 6.60 and 5.68 average donations in the 8-, 10- and 12- week arms) and for females (5.10, 4.60 and 4.01 donations in the 12-, 14- and 16- week arms). For males, the average rate of deferral for low haemoglobin per session attended, was 5.71% (8- week arm), 3.73% (10- week), and 2.55% (12- week), and for females the rates were: 7.92% (12-week), 6.63% (14- week), and 5.05% (16- week). Donors' QoL was similar across strategies, although self-reported symptoms were increased with shorter donation intervals. The shorter interval strategies increased average cost, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £9.51 (95% CI 9.33 to 9.69) per additional whole-blood donation for the 8- versus 12- week interval for males, and £10.17 (95% CI 9.80 to 10.54) for the 12- versus 16- week interval arm for females.
Over two years, reducing the minimum donation interval could provide additional units of whole-blood at a small additional cost, including for those donor subgroups whose blood type is in relatively high demand. However, the significance of self-reported symptoms needs to be investigated further before these policies are expanded.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272854</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35976959</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Biology and Life Sciences ; Blood & organ donations ; Blood Donors ; Blood groups ; Blood tests ; Consent ; Coronaviruses ; Cost analysis ; Cost benefit analysis ; COVID-19 ; Effectiveness ; Ethnicity ; Evaluation ; Female ; Females ; Gender ; Hemoglobin ; Hemoglobins - analysis ; Humans ; Intervals ; Male ; Males ; Management ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Minority & ethnic groups ; People and Places ; Quality of Life ; Questionnaires ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Social Sciences ; Subgroups</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2022-08, Vol.17 (8), p.e0272854</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2022 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2022 Sadique et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 Sadique et al 2022 Sadique et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-a99cc37324ba283832fee5ef2db9b796553f0b85679bae25c0398283ac1812b13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-a99cc37324ba283832fee5ef2db9b796553f0b85679bae25c0398283ac1812b13</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5814-0258 ; 0000-0002-4370-2606</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9384981/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9384981/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79343,79344</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35976959$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Tischer, Thomas</contributor><creatorcontrib>Sadique, Zia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willis, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corte, Kaat De</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pennington, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moore, Carmel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaptoge, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Angelantonio, Emanuele Di</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miflin, Gail</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberts, David J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grieve, Richard</creatorcontrib><title>Cost-effectiveness of alternative minimum recall intervals between whole blood donations</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>The INTERVAL trial showed shorter inter-donation intervals could safely increase the frequency of whole-blood donation. We extended the INTERVAL trial to consider the relative cost-effectiveness of reduced inter-donation intervals.
Our within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) used data from 44,863 whole-blood donors randomly assigned to 12, 10 or 8 week (males), and 16, 14 or 12 week inter-donation intervals (females). The CEA analysed the number of whole-blood donations, deferrals including low- haemoglobin deferrals, and donors' health-related quality of life (QoL) to report costs and cost-effectiveness over two years.
The mean number of blood donation visits over two years was higher for the reduced interval strategies, for males (7.76, 6.60 and 5.68 average donations in the 8-, 10- and 12- week arms) and for females (5.10, 4.60 and 4.01 donations in the 12-, 14- and 16- week arms). For males, the average rate of deferral for low haemoglobin per session attended, was 5.71% (8- week arm), 3.73% (10- week), and 2.55% (12- week), and for females the rates were: 7.92% (12-week), 6.63% (14- week), and 5.05% (16- week). Donors' QoL was similar across strategies, although self-reported symptoms were increased with shorter donation intervals. The shorter interval strategies increased average cost, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £9.51 (95% CI 9.33 to 9.69) per additional whole-blood donation for the 8- versus 12- week interval for males, and £10.17 (95% CI 9.80 to 10.54) for the 12- versus 16- week interval arm for females.
Over two years, reducing the minimum donation interval could provide additional units of whole-blood at a small additional cost, including for those donor subgroups whose blood type is in relatively high demand. However, the significance of self-reported symptoms needs to be investigated further before these policies are expanded.</description><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Blood & organ donations</subject><subject>Blood Donors</subject><subject>Blood groups</subject><subject>Blood tests</subject><subject>Consent</subject><subject>Coronaviruses</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Cost benefit analysis</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>Effectiveness</subject><subject>Ethnicity</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Females</subject><subject>Gender</subject><subject>Hemoglobin</subject><subject>Hemoglobins - analysis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intervals</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Males</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Minority & ethnic groups</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Subgroups</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk12L1DAUhoso7rr6D0QLgujFjPlomuRGWAY_BhYW_MK7kCanMxnSZm3aWf33pjvdZSp7Ib1oOXne95ycnpNlzzFaYsrxu10Yulb75VVoYYkIJ4IVD7JTLClZlATRh0ffJ9mTGHcIMSrK8nF2QpnkpWTyNPu5CrFfQF2D6d0eWogxD3WufQ_JfQzljWtdMzR5B0Z7n7s2He21j3kF_TVAm19vg4e88iHY3IZRFdr4NHtUJwieTe-z7PvHD99WnxcXl5_Wq_OLhSkl6RdaSmMop6SoNBFUUFIDMKiJrWTFZckYrVElWMllpYEwg6gUCdQGC0wqTM-ylwffKx-impoSFeGIJjeBZCLWB8IGvVNXnWt090cF7dRNIHQbpbveGQ-KI2kLzrWsrE0FcQEW25SmqEiJZFkmr_dTtqFqwBpo-077men8pHVbtQl7JakopBjLfTMZdOHXALFXjYsGvNcthOFQd4FLjkhCX_2D3n-7idrodAHX1iHlNaOpOue4wIxxMda9vIdKj4XGmTRBtUvxmeDtTJCYHn73Gz3EqNZfv_w_e_ljzr4-YreQBm0bgx9uZmYOFgfQdCHGDuq7JmOkxgW47YYaF0BNC5BkL45_0J3oduLpXxmGAPI</recordid><startdate>20220817</startdate><enddate>20220817</enddate><creator>Sadique, Zia</creator><creator>Willis, Sarah</creator><creator>Corte, Kaat De</creator><creator>Pennington, Mark</creator><creator>Moore, Carmel</creator><creator>Kaptoge, Stephen</creator><creator>Angelantonio, Emanuele Di</creator><creator>Miflin, Gail</creator><creator>Roberts, David J</creator><creator>Grieve, Richard</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>COVID</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5814-0258</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4370-2606</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220817</creationdate><title>Cost-effectiveness of alternative minimum recall intervals between whole blood donations</title><author>Sadique, Zia ; Willis, Sarah ; Corte, Kaat De ; Pennington, Mark ; Moore, Carmel ; Kaptoge, Stephen ; Angelantonio, Emanuele Di ; Miflin, Gail ; Roberts, David J ; Grieve, Richard</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-a99cc37324ba283832fee5ef2db9b796553f0b85679bae25c0398283ac1812b13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Blood & organ donations</topic><topic>Blood Donors</topic><topic>Blood groups</topic><topic>Blood tests</topic><topic>Consent</topic><topic>Coronaviruses</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Cost benefit analysis</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>Effectiveness</topic><topic>Ethnicity</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Females</topic><topic>Gender</topic><topic>Hemoglobin</topic><topic>Hemoglobins - analysis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intervals</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Males</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Minority & ethnic groups</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Subgroups</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sadique, Zia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willis, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corte, Kaat De</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pennington, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moore, Carmel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaptoge, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Angelantonio, Emanuele Di</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miflin, Gail</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberts, David J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grieve, Richard</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Opposing Viewpoints in Context (Gale)</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Proquest Nursing & Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Coronavirus Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sadique, Zia</au><au>Willis, Sarah</au><au>Corte, Kaat De</au><au>Pennington, Mark</au><au>Moore, Carmel</au><au>Kaptoge, Stephen</au><au>Angelantonio, Emanuele Di</au><au>Miflin, Gail</au><au>Roberts, David J</au><au>Grieve, Richard</au><au>Tischer, Thomas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost-effectiveness of alternative minimum recall intervals between whole blood donations</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2022-08-17</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>e0272854</spage><pages>e0272854-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>The INTERVAL trial showed shorter inter-donation intervals could safely increase the frequency of whole-blood donation. We extended the INTERVAL trial to consider the relative cost-effectiveness of reduced inter-donation intervals.
Our within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) used data from 44,863 whole-blood donors randomly assigned to 12, 10 or 8 week (males), and 16, 14 or 12 week inter-donation intervals (females). The CEA analysed the number of whole-blood donations, deferrals including low- haemoglobin deferrals, and donors' health-related quality of life (QoL) to report costs and cost-effectiveness over two years.
The mean number of blood donation visits over two years was higher for the reduced interval strategies, for males (7.76, 6.60 and 5.68 average donations in the 8-, 10- and 12- week arms) and for females (5.10, 4.60 and 4.01 donations in the 12-, 14- and 16- week arms). For males, the average rate of deferral for low haemoglobin per session attended, was 5.71% (8- week arm), 3.73% (10- week), and 2.55% (12- week), and for females the rates were: 7.92% (12-week), 6.63% (14- week), and 5.05% (16- week). Donors' QoL was similar across strategies, although self-reported symptoms were increased with shorter donation intervals. The shorter interval strategies increased average cost, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £9.51 (95% CI 9.33 to 9.69) per additional whole-blood donation for the 8- versus 12- week interval for males, and £10.17 (95% CI 9.80 to 10.54) for the 12- versus 16- week interval arm for females.
Over two years, reducing the minimum donation interval could provide additional units of whole-blood at a small additional cost, including for those donor subgroups whose blood type is in relatively high demand. However, the significance of self-reported symptoms needs to be investigated further before these policies are expanded.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>35976959</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0272854</doi><tpages>e0272854</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5814-0258</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4370-2606</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2022-08, Vol.17 (8), p.e0272854 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2703383809 |
| source | Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Biology and Life Sciences Blood & organ donations Blood Donors Blood groups Blood tests Consent Coronaviruses Cost analysis Cost benefit analysis COVID-19 Effectiveness Ethnicity Evaluation Female Females Gender Hemoglobin Hemoglobins - analysis Humans Intervals Male Males Management Medicine and Health Sciences Minority & ethnic groups People and Places Quality of Life Questionnaires Research and Analysis Methods Social Sciences Subgroups |
| title | Cost-effectiveness of alternative minimum recall intervals between whole blood donations |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T00%3A35%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost-effectiveness%20of%20alternative%20minimum%20recall%20intervals%20between%20whole%20blood%20donations&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Sadique,%20Zia&rft.date=2022-08-17&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=e0272854&rft.pages=e0272854-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0272854&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA714155786%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2703383809&rft_id=info:pmid/35976959&rft_galeid=A714155786&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_709d477a9bdd4ba78ed1d12b4b260966&rfr_iscdi=true |