Dataset Information

Longer-term efficiency and safety of increasing the frequency of whole blood donation (INTERVAL): extension study of a randomised trial of 20 757 blood donors.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The INTERVAL trial showed that, over a 2-year period, inter-donation intervals for whole blood donation can be safely reduced to meet blood shortages. We extended the INTERVAL trial for a further 2 years to evaluate the longer-term risks and benefits of varying inter-donation intervals, and to compare routine versus more intensive reminders to help donors keep appointments.

Methods

The INTERVAL trial was a parallel group, pragmatic, randomised trial that recruited blood donors aged 18 years or older from 25 static donor centres of NHS Blood and Transplant across England, UK. Here we report on the prespecified analyses after 4 years of follow-up. Participants were whole blood donors who agreed to continue trial participation on their originally allocated inter-donation intervals (men: 12, 10, and 8 weeks; women: 16, 14, and 12 weeks). They were further block-randomised (1:1) to routine versus more intensive reminders using computer-generated random sequences. The prespecified primary outcome was units of blood collected per year analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary outcomes related to safety were quality of life, self-reported symptoms potentially related to donation, haemoglobin and ferritin concentrations, and deferrals because of low haemoglobin and other factors. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN24760606, and has completed.

Findings

Between Oct 19, 2014, and May 3, 2016, 20 757 of the 38 035 invited blood donors (10 843 [58%] men, 9914 [51%] women) participated in the extension study. 10 378 (50%) were randomly assigned to routine reminders and 10 379 (50%) were randomly assigned to more intensive reminders. Median follow-up was 1·1 years (IQR 0·7-1·3). Compared with routine reminders, more intensive reminders increased blood collection by a mean of 0·11 units per year (95% CI 0·04-0·17; p=0·0003) in men and 0·06 units per year (0·01-0·11; p=0·0094) in women. During the extension study, each week shorter inter-donation interval increased blood collection by a mean of 0·23 units per year (0·21-0·25) in men and 0·14 units per year (0·12-0·15) in women (both p<0·0001). More frequent donation resulted in more deferrals for low haemoglobin (odds ratio per week shorter inter-donation interval 1·19 [95% CI 1·15-1·22] in men and 1·10 [1·06-1·14] in women), and lower mean haemoglobin (difference per week shorter inter-donation interval -0·84 g/L [95% CI -0·99 to -0·70] in men and -0·45 g/L [-0·59 to -0·31] in women) and ferritin concentrations (percentage difference per week shorter inter-donation interval -6·5% [95% CI -7·6 to -5·5] in men and -5·3% [-6·5 to -4·2] in women; all p<0·0001). No differences were observed in quality of life, serious adverse events, or self-reported symptoms (p>0.0001 for tests of linear trend by inter-donation intervals) other than a higher reported frequency of doctor-diagnosed low iron concentrations and prescription of iron supplements in men (p<0·0001).

Interpretation

During a period of up to 4 years, shorter inter-donation intervals and more intensive reminders resulted in more blood being collected without a detectable effect on donors' mental and physical wellbeing. However, donors had decreased haemoglobin concentrations and more self-reported symptoms compared with the initial 2 years of the trial. Our findings suggest that blood collection services could safely use shorter donation intervals and more intensive reminders to meet shortages, for donors who maintain adequate haemoglobin concentrations and iron stores.

Funding

NHS Blood and Transplant, UK National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, and British Heart Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Kaptoge S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7029279 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLimits on the frequency of whole blood donation exist primarily to safeguard donor health. However, there is substantial variation across blood services in the maximum frequency of donations allowed. We compared standard practice in the UK with shorter inter-donation intervals used in other countries.MethodsIn this parallel group, pragmatic, randomised trial, we recruited whole blood donors aged 18 years or older from 25 centres across England, UK. By use of a computer-based algorithm, men were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 12-week (standard) versus 10-week versus 8-week inter-donation intervals, and women were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 16-week (standard) versus 14-week versus 12-week intervals. Participants were not masked to their allocated intervention group. The primary outcome was the number of donations over 2 years. Secondary outcomes related to safety were quality of life, symptoms potentially related to donation, physical activity, cognitive function, haemoglobin and ferritin concentrations, and deferrals because of low haemoglobin. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN24760606, and is ongoing but no longer recruiting participants.Findings45 263 whole blood donors (22 466 men, 22 797 women) were recruited between June 11, 2012, and June 15, 2014. Data were analysed for 45 042 (99·5%) participants. Men were randomly assigned to the 12-week (n=7452) versus 10-week (n=7449) versus 8-week (n=7456) groups; and women to the 16-week (n=7550) versus 14-week (n=7567) versus 12-week (n=7568) groups. In men, compared with the 12-week group, the mean amount of blood collected per donor over 2 years increased by 1·69 units (95% CI 1·59-1·80; approximately 795 mL) in the 8-week group and by 0·79 units (0·69-0·88; approximately 370 mL) in the 10-week group (p<0·0001 for both). In women, compared with the 16-week group, it increased by 0·84 units (95% CI 0·76-0·91; approximately 395 mL) in the 12-week group and by 0·46 units (0·39-0·53; approximately 215 mL) in the 14-week group (p<0·0001 for both). No significant differences were observed in quality of life, physical activity, or cognitive function across randomised groups. However, more frequent donation resulted in more donation-related symptoms (eg, tiredness, breathlessness, feeling faint, dizziness, and restless legs, especially among men [for all listed symptoms]), lower mean haemoglobin and ferritin concentrations, and more deferrals for low haemoglobin (p<0·0001 for each) than those observed in the standard frequency groups.InterpretationOver 2 years, more frequent donation than is standard practice in the UK collected substantially more blood without having a major effect on donors' quality of life, physical activity, or cognitive function, but resulted in more donation-related symptoms, deferrals, and iron deficiency.FundingNHS Blood and Transplant, National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, and British Heart Foundation.

Project description:ImportanceBlood donation is critical for health care systems, but donor retention remains challenging. Understanding donors' preferences can inform incentive design and improve retention rates.ObjectiveTo identify donor preferences for incentive attributes and their relative importance in promoting blood donation among Chinese donors in Shandong.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study fielded a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with a dual response design among blood donors, analyzing the responses under forced and unforced choice settings. The study took place from January 1 to April 30, 2022, in 3 cities (Yantai, Jinan, and Heze) representing diverse socioeconomic strata in Shandong, China. Eligible participants were blood donors aged 18 to 60 years who had donated within the preceding 12 months. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling. Data were analyzed from May to June 2022.ExposureRespondents were presented with different blood donation incentive profiles, varying in health examination, blood recipient, honor recognition, travel time, and gift value.Main outcome and measureRespondent preferences for nonmonetary incentive attributes, attribute relative importance, willingness-to-discard values for attribute improvement, and estimated uptake of new incentive profiles.ResultsA total of 650 donors were invited, of which 477 were included for analysis. The respondents were predominately male (308 respondents [64.6%]), aged 18 to 34 years (291 respondents [61.0%]), and had undergraduate degrees or higher (286 respondents [59.9%]). Among the 477 valid respondents, the mean (SD) age was 31.9 (11.2) years. Respondents preferred comprehensive health examination, family members as recipients, central government recognition, 30-minute travel time, and a gift valued at 60 Renminbi (RMB). No significant differences were found between the model results of forced and unforced choice setting. Blood recipient was the most important attribute, followed by health examination and gifts, and then honor and travel time. Respondents were willing to discard RMB 32 (95% CI, 18-46) for an improved health examination and RMB 69 (95% CI, 47-92) for changing the recipient from themselves to family members. Scenario analysis estimated 80.3% (SE, 0.024) of donors would endorse the new incentive profile if the recipient was changed from themselves to family members.Conclusions and relevanceIn this survey study, blood recipient, health examination, and gift value were perceived more important as nonmonetary incentives than travel time and honor recognition. Tailoring incentives according to these preferences may improve donor retention. Further research could help refine and optimize incentive schemes for blood donation promotion.

Project description:IntroductionWaiting rooms in general practitioners' (GP) surgeries are a potentially useful site for spreading educational messages about health behaviors. We aimed to evaluate the impact of posters displayed in GPs' waiting rooms on the number of donors attending the blood donation drives in the Aube Department of France. The secondary objective was to identify self-reported factors that incited people to give blood among donors who did and donors who did not see the posters.MethodsObservational, multicenter, prospective study, from 1 June to 31 December 2021. Six blood donation centers in the Aube Department were selected. All GPs located within a 15 km radius around each center were invited to participate by hanging posters advertising blood drives in their waiting rooms. The number of blood donations per hour was measured before and during the campaign. Factors prompting people to give blood were evaluated by questionnaires completed by persons attending the blood drives.Results33 GPs participated. The number of donations per hour was lower in the year in which the posters were displayed (2021) compared to the previous year (12 vs. 15). A total of 1,469 questionnaires were completed by blood donors: 729 reported having seen the posters, and 740 reported not having seen the posters. Those who claimed to have seen the posters were more likely than those who claimed not to have seen the posters to respond that in parallel, they had been prompted to give blood via online publicity (7.5 vs. 3.9%, adjusted Odds ratio [aOR] 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-2.82, p = 0.02). They also more often reported that they had been prompted to donate by television advertisements (8.0 vs. 4.2%, aOR 1.74, 95%CI 1.10-2.76, p = 0.02). Overall, 68% of all respondents indicated that posters in the GP's waiting room would incite them to give blood more often.ConclusionThe number of blood donations per hour was lower during the year in which posters were displayed. Questionnaire data from donors suggests that promoting blood donation via posters in GPs' waiting rooms could have a positive effect: 68% of donors claimed that posters would incite them to give blood.

Project description:Background:Understanding the demographic features of blood donors is important for identifying the donor structure and guiding the recruitment and retention strategies of donors. This study was aimed to determine the demographic characteristics of blood donors, the types of donation drives, and the frequency and reasons for pre-donation deferral in our population. Methods:This cross-sectional study included data analysis of all prospective blood donors presenting themselves for donation at the Blood Bank of the King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia between January 2010 and December 2018. Eligibility of blood donation was assessed using a standardized history questionnaire, physical examination, hemoglobin estimation, pulse rate, blood pressure, and temperature. The questionnaire included the demographic features of the donor such as age, gender, and the reason for donation and other specific risk factors that potentially affect the safety of the donor or the recipient. Data analyzed using the analysis of SPSS version 20 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) were used to calculate the unadjusted odds ratios (OR) and the respective 95% confidence interval for the association between the various demographic parameters. Results:A total of 28,189 potential donations were recorded during the study period; of these, 77.4% were family replacements with females accounting for only 1.8% of all donations. Most of the donors were Saudi nationals (92.1%) of whom donors between 18 and 34 years old constituted 87.9%, while those over 40 years old represented only 7.9% of the donations. Pre-donation temporary deferral occurred in 3300 (11.7%) of all potential donation attempts. The most common causes being the recent intake of medication (24.4%) followed by low hemoglobin (14.8%), low or high blood pressure (14.6%), low or high pulse rate (13.6%), and low weight (11.6%). Conclusion:A profile of blood donors consisting mainly of young male citizens who mostly donated for family replacement was detected. Deferral rate was found to be average when compared to other countries; the causes being similar to those detected in other developed countries. Simple descriptive statistics has shown no marked difference was noted over the 9 years of the study in neither the profile of blood donors nor the cause for temporary deferral of prospective blood donors.