Donors who react may not come back: Analysis of repeat donation as a function of phlebotomist ratings of vasovagal reactions

France, Christopher; Rader, Aaron; Carlson, Bruce W.

doi:10.1016/j.transci.2005.02.005

Cited by 132 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

174

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Newman et al [35] elucidated, through post-donation interviews of BD donors, a substantial drop of donor return rates even after mild local and systemic UEs such as small hematomas, sore arm, fatigue, and/or circulatory donor reaction. Others also established a relationship of mild donor reactions after BD to a lesser likelihood of donor return [36,37,38,39,40]. Although frequent PPP donations at short intervals provided good feedback on local and systemic UEs occurring after leaving the center, there is 1 limitation to our analysis: we did not obtain systematical post-donation UE feedback from non-returning donors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Donor Hemovigilance during Preparatory Plasmapheresis

Diekamp¹,

Gneißl²,

Rabe³

et al. 2014

Transfus Med Hemother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Reports on unexpected donor events (UEs) during preparatory plasmapheresis (PPP) are scarce, and rarely consider technical UEs. Methods: Defined local and systemic UEs were graded by severity; technical UEs were not graded. On January 1, 2008, E.B.P.S.-Logistics (EBPS) installed the UE module for plasma management software (PMS). Donor room physicians entered UEs daily into the PMS. Medical directors reviewed entries quarterly. EBPS compiled data on donors, donations and UEs from January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2011. Results: 66,822 UEs were observed during 1,107,846 PPPs for a corrected incidence of 6.55% (1.4% local, 0.55% systemic, 4.6% technical UEs). 3.36% of PPPs were accompanied by 1 UE and 1.18% by >1 UE (2-5). 13.7% of donors undergoing PPP for the first time, 9.7% of those having a second PPP and 4.0% of those having a third or more PPPs were associated with UEs. Most common UEs were repeated venipuncture, and broken-off collection due to venous access problems and small hematomas. Severe systemic UEs occurred at a rate of 36 per 100,000 PPPs. Conclusions: Technical UEs were common with PPP. UEs accompanied first and second donations significantly more frequently than for subsequent donations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Donor Hemovigilance during Preparatory Plasmapheresis

Diekamp¹,

Gneißl²,

Rabe³

et al. 2014

Transfus Med Hemother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Newman et al [11] elucidated through post-donation interviews of blood donors a substantial drop of donor return rates even after mild local and systemic UEs such as small hematomas, sore arm, fatigue, and/or circulatory donor reaction. Others also established a relationship between mild donor reactions after BD and a lesser likelihood of donor return [6,7,13,27,28]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The catalogue of technical UEs is new to donor hemovigilance. Although Klein et al []4[7] reviewed complications related to equipment and technique, their report dealt mainly with cytapheresis procedures. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The European Guide to Preparation, Use and Quality Assurance of Blood Components listed adverse reactions related to BDs and included donor safety to its standards [5]. Several investigators studied intensively issues of blood donor safety and explored ways to avoid unexpected events (UEs) [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. In 2003, we established in 6 centers an UE documentation system for local, systemic, and technical problems, side effects, untoward occurrences, and operator errors accompanying BDs, including those resulting in discontinued collections [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Donor Hemovigilance with Blood Donation

Diekamp¹,

Gneißl²,

Rabe³

et al. 2015

Transfus Med Hemother

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Reports on unexpected events (UEs) during blood donation (BD) inadequately consider the role of technical UEs. Methods: Defined local andsystemic UEs were graded by severity; technical UEs were not graded. On January 1, 2008, E.B.P.S.-Logistics (EBPS) installed the UE module for plasma management software (PMS). Donor room physicians entered UEs daily into PMS. Medical directors reviewed entries quarterly. EBPS compiled data on donors, donations, and UEs from January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2011. Results: 6,605 UEs were observed during 166,650 BDs from 57,622 donors for a corrected incidence of 4.30% (0.66% local, 1.59% systemic, 2.04% technical UEs). 2.96% of BDs were accompanied by one UE and 0.45% by >1 UE (2-4). 6.3% of donors donating blood for their first time, 3.5% of those giving blood for their second time, and 1.9% of donors giving their third or more BD experienced UEs. Most common UEs were: discontinued collections due to venous access problems, repeated venipuncture, and small hematomas. Severe circulatory UEs occurred at a rate of 16 per 100,000 BDs. Conclusions: Technical UEs were common during BD. UEs accompanied first and second donations significantly more often than subsequent donations.

show abstract

“…Bunun yanı sıra cinsiyetin yeniden verici olma oranını etkileyip etkilemediği açık değildir. 33 Her iki cinsiyette de reaksiyon gelişmesinin sadece kan ba-ğışı davranışıyla ilişkili olmadığı, aynı zamanda öz-yeterlik duygusuyla ve duyuşsal tutum düzeyiyle de ilişkili olabileceği belirtilmektedir. 24 Pakistan'da 674 vericiyle yapılan çalışmada, medeni durumla vazovagal reaksiyonlar arasında ilişki bulunmuştur.…”

Section: Kan Bağişina Bağli Kompli̇kasyonlarin Geli̇şmesi̇ni̇ Etki̇leyen Eunclassified

Complications Developed Due to Blood Donation: Review

İnce¹,

Khorshıd²

2016

Turkiye Klinikleri J Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

53Kan Bağışı Nedeniyle Gelişen Komplikasyonlar Ö ÖZ ZE ET T Hastalar için kan ve kan ürünlerine olan talebin artması, tüm dünyada mücadele etmeyi gerektiren bir duruma yol açmıştır. Kan ihtiyacının karşılanması, sağlık gönüllülerine ve onların sü-rekli olarak kan ve kan ürünlerini verme istekliliğine bağlıdır. Kan bağışı genel olarak güvenli bir yöntem olarak kabul edilir. Ancak, işlem sırası ya da sonrasında şiddeti farklılık gösteren bazı istenmeyen komplikasyonlar görülebilir. Kan bağışı ile ilgili yan etkilerin sıklığı, güvenli ve uygun donörlerin olduğu havuzu azaltmaktadır. Bu da tekrarlı kan bağış oranını düşürmekte ve her geçen gün aralıksız ve sürekli artan kan ihtiyacına ilişkin talebi karşılamakta güçlüğe neden olmaktadır. Kan bağışında bulunanların genç olması, kadın olması, ilk kez kan vermesi, tahmin edilenden daha düşük kan volümüne sahip olması gibi bazı özelliklerinin, daha yüksek komplikasyon sıklığı ile iliş-kili olduğu ortaya konmuştur. Kan bağışı ile ilgili bazı reaksiyonlar ciddi sonuçlara yol açabilirler. Bunlar ekimoz, hematom, arter delinmesi, kol ağrısı, tromboflebit, enfeksiyon riski, sinir yaralanması, kronik bölgesel ağrı sendromu ve vazovagal reaksiyonlardır. Bu komplikasyonlar ve baş dön-mesi, bulantı, baygınlık gibi ilişkili semptomlar, istemli kan vericilerini, gelecekte tekrar kan bağışında bulunmaları için caydırabilir. Hemşireler kan bağışı sırasında gelişebilecek komplikasyonların farkında olmalı ve yüksek risk grubundaki bireyler için gerekli önlemleri almalıdır. Bu makalede, kan bağışı sırasında oluşan komplikasyonların önlenmesine yardım edebilecek uygulamalar sunulmuştur.A An na ah ht ta ar r K Ke el li im me el le er r: : Kan vericiler; komplikasyonlar; hemşirelik A AB BS ST TR RA AC CT T Incrementing request of blood and blood products for patients has caused a status for defiance for the blood banks in all world. Meeting the need for blood products depends on the existence of healthy volunteers and their continued availability to donate blood and blood products. While blood donation is generally accepted as a safe procedure, some adverse complications of variable severity may be observed during or after the operation. Frequent side effects associated with blood donation reduce the pool of safe and reliable donors, sinking the repeat donation rate. This in turn, reduce the blood donation rate, cause to difficulties in meeting the continually increasing demand for blood. Certain characteristics such as the young age and the female sex of the donors, first time donors and smaller estimated blood volume have been shown to be related to the frequency of complication. Some reactions related to blood donation have the potential to lead to serious results. These are, bruise, haematoma, arterial punctures, sore arm, thrombophlebitis, risk of infection, nerve injuries, chronic regional pain syndrome and vasovagal reactions. These complications and related symptoms such as dizziness, nauses and fainting can dissuade volunteer blood donors from returning to donate in the future. N...

show abstract

Donors who react may not come back: Analysis of repeat donation as a function of phlebotomist ratings of vasovagal reactions

Cited by 132 publications

References 15 publications

Donor Hemovigilance during Preparatory Plasmapheresis

Donor Hemovigilance during Preparatory Plasmapheresis

Donor Hemovigilance with Blood Donation

Complications Developed Due to Blood Donation: Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About