Parental versus non‐parental–directed donation: an 11‐year experience of infectious disease testing at a pediatric tertiary care blood donor center
BACKGROUND Directed donation is associated with a higher prevalence of donations that are positive for infectious disease markers; however, little is known about the positive rates among parental‐directed, non‐parental–directed, and allogeneic donations. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS We reviewed blood‐co...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) Pa.), 2017-11, Vol.57 (11), p.2799-2803 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | BACKGROUND
Directed donation is associated with a higher prevalence of donations that are positive for infectious disease markers; however, little is known about the positive rates among parental‐directed, non‐parental–directed, and allogeneic donations.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
We reviewed blood‐collection records from January 1997 through December 2008, including infectious disease results, among parental, non‐parental, and community donations. Infectious disease rates were compared by Mann‐Whitney U test.
RESULTS
In total, 1532 parental, 4910 non‐parental, and 17,423 community donations were examined. Among parental donors, the median rate of positive infectious disease testing was 8.66% (interquartile range (IQR), 4.49%) for first‐time donors and 1.26% (IQR, 5.86%) for repeat donors; among non‐parental donors, the rate was 1.09% (IQR, 0.98%) for first‐time donors and 0% (IQR, 0.83%) for repeat donors; and, among community donors, the rate was 2.95% (IQR, 1.50%) for first‐time donors and 0.45% (IQR, 0.82%) for repeat donors. The mean rate of positive infectious disease testing for first‐time parental donors was significantly higher (7.63%), whereas all repeat donors had similar rates. However, the rate of positive infectious disease testing among first‐time non‐parental donors was significantly lower than that in the other groups, especially for the period from 2001 through 2008.
CONCLUSION
First‐time non‐parental and community donors had significantly higher infectious disease risk than the respective repeat donors. First‐time parental donors had the highest rates of positive infectious disease testing. We suggest that first‐time parental blood donation should be discouraged. Repeat community donors or first‐time non‐parental donors provide a safer alternative. These findings can foster better patient education, donor selection, and possibly a reduced risk of infectious disease. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0041-1132 1537-2995 |
DOI: | 10.1111/trf.14312 |