A high proportion of illicit drug users accepting referral to a weekly HCV peer-support group at a multidisciplinary health centre were assessed and treated for HCV infection. Peer support coupled with multidisciplinary care is an effective strategy for engaging illicit drug users in HCV care.

The rate of reinfection following treatment for HCV infection among current and former IDUs engaged in a multidisciplinary program is low.

Despite that 60-90% of injection drug users (IDUs) are infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, IDUs are often denied therapy based on concerns of reinfection following treatment. However, there are little data in this regard. We evaluated HCV re-infection following sustained virologic response (SVR) among HCV-infected IDUs having received HCV treatment in a multidisciplinary program. Following treatment, participants were encouraged to return at follow-up intervals of 1 year and illicit drug use histories were obtained. In those with SVR, HCV RNA testing by PCR was performed to determine if relapse or reinfection occurred.

Background and Objectives Phlebotomy is a central task for whole blood donation, yet there are no published standards regarding systematic donor vein assessment or the impact of vein quality on successful blood donation. Blood donation failures and related adverse events are highly predictive of donors not returning for future blood donation. A specific blood donation vein scoring tool was assessed to measure donor vein suitability for whole blood collection and investigate the correlation of the donor’s veins with donation outcomes. Materials and Methods The vein assessment tool consisted of three questions using a 5‐point Likert‐type scale to measure responses. Two phlebotomists performed blinded assessments of each donor’s veins on each arm using the tool. The individual measures were then aggregated to provide a total vein score out of 12. Inter‐rater reliability of the vein score tool was assessed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient for absolute agreement. Results Fifty‐seven phlebotomists across four fixed blood donation centres performed paired vein assessments on 553 blood donors. The intraclass correlation coefficient indicated moderate inter‐rater reliability was achieved. The median scores for viable donations were 10, for non‐viable donations were 6·5 and for failed phlebotomies were 4. Donation histories of donors with lower vein scores indicated lower success during blood donation. Conclusion The vein score tool appears to be predictive of a successful donation outcome, however, since there was not a suitably high correlation between the scores of the two assessors, further refinement of the tool will be required prior to wider use.

Background and objectivesPhlebotomy is a central task for blood donation; however, not all blood donors have veins that are easy to see or feel. This study aimed to determine whether use of a surgical skin marker to highlight the donors’ vein location and direction prior to venepuncture increased blood donation success.MethodsAll blood donors who participated in this study were eligible to donate according to Australian guidelines. Ten donor centres with phlebotomy success rates <95% were selected. A randomized cluster trial design assigned five sites to test the skin marking device and five sites as controls. Single‐use sterile Gentian violet skin marker pens were used to mark donors’ veins. Phlebotomy site skin bacterial load after using the skin marking device was tested on a subset of 100 donors. Phlebotomy success rates and donor adverse events were recorded.ResultsOf the control donors, 6993 had successful phlebotomies and 225 failed. Of the skin marker donors, 6998 had successful phlebotomies and 248 failed. No statistically significant differences in phlebotomy success were found between the two groups (OR: 0·91, 96·4% CI [96·0, 96·8], P‐value 0·348).ConclusionThe use of skin marker pens did not increase overall phlebotomy success rate. There was no increase in phlebotomy site skin bacterial load, and amendments to standard skin disinfection techniques were not required. Blood donors were not concerned about the pen mark on their arms. Generally, staff indicated that the markers may be valuable to assist with phlebotomies for donors with difficult or deep veins.