Lack of standardization of blood donor recruitment processes: A two-center mixed-methods audit study in Ghana.

IF 2.1 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
SAGE Open Medicine Pub Date : 2025-10-01 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20503121251380641
Daniel Baah, Joseph Kofi Amponsah, Ama Gyasiwaah Owusu-Poku, Joseph Boachie, Patrick Adu
{"title":"Lack of standardization of blood donor recruitment processes: A two-center mixed-methods audit study in Ghana.","authors":"Daniel Baah, Joseph Kofi Amponsah, Ama Gyasiwaah Owusu-Poku, Joseph Boachie, Patrick Adu","doi":"10.1177/20503121251380641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Sub-Saharan African countries perennially suffer acute donor blood shortfalls. Clinical audit is a quality improvement strategy that enables the identification of actionable points to improve healthcare delivery. This study audited the blood donor recruitment processes at two Ghanaian secondary healthcare facilities to identify areas that can be leveraged to improve donor blood stocks.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a sequential, exploratory mixed-methods study. First, 30 real-time observations of prospective blood donor-laboratorian interactions were undertaken using checklists. Subsequently, 2 sets of semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect data on pre-donation screening, blood donor privacy, and postblood donation care from the perspectives of 135 blood donors and 134 laboratory staff.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The observational data collection found a general inter- and intrapractitioner variation in blood donor recruitment procedures. Overwhelmingly, prospective donors were males (91.1%), or 20-39 years old (80.7%). Also, only 5.9% of prospective donors were voluntary nonremunerated, whereas 34.8% were deferred. Overwhelmingly, laboratory staff and prospective donors indicated that neither donor information leaflet (97.0% versus 98.5%, respectively), nor medication deferral list (93.3% versus 97.8%, respectively) was employed during the blood donor screening process. Also, whereas 88.2% of successful donors indicated being unaware of any focal person to contact in the event of adverse postdonation symptoms, laboratorians indicated that there was no focal person for handling issues related to successful (94.8%) or deferred (90.0%) blood donors. Furthermore, 42.3% of laboratorians indicated that prospective donors with permanent deferral results are fully informed, compared to 58.2% who indicated uneasiness when disclosing reactive screening results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The adoption of standard operating procedures may help prevent interfacility and interpractitioner variability in blood donor recruitment practices. Interventional implementation research may help to improve pre- and postdonation services offered to both successful and deferred donors in the study settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":21398,"journal":{"name":"SAGE Open Medicine","volume":"13 ","pages":"20503121251380641"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12491811/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SAGE Open Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20503121251380641","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Sub-Saharan African countries perennially suffer acute donor blood shortfalls. Clinical audit is a quality improvement strategy that enables the identification of actionable points to improve healthcare delivery. This study audited the blood donor recruitment processes at two Ghanaian secondary healthcare facilities to identify areas that can be leveraged to improve donor blood stocks.

Methods: This was a sequential, exploratory mixed-methods study. First, 30 real-time observations of prospective blood donor-laboratorian interactions were undertaken using checklists. Subsequently, 2 sets of semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect data on pre-donation screening, blood donor privacy, and postblood donation care from the perspectives of 135 blood donors and 134 laboratory staff.

Results: The observational data collection found a general inter- and intrapractitioner variation in blood donor recruitment procedures. Overwhelmingly, prospective donors were males (91.1%), or 20-39 years old (80.7%). Also, only 5.9% of prospective donors were voluntary nonremunerated, whereas 34.8% were deferred. Overwhelmingly, laboratory staff and prospective donors indicated that neither donor information leaflet (97.0% versus 98.5%, respectively), nor medication deferral list (93.3% versus 97.8%, respectively) was employed during the blood donor screening process. Also, whereas 88.2% of successful donors indicated being unaware of any focal person to contact in the event of adverse postdonation symptoms, laboratorians indicated that there was no focal person for handling issues related to successful (94.8%) or deferred (90.0%) blood donors. Furthermore, 42.3% of laboratorians indicated that prospective donors with permanent deferral results are fully informed, compared to 58.2% who indicated uneasiness when disclosing reactive screening results.

Conclusions: The adoption of standard operating procedures may help prevent interfacility and interpractitioner variability in blood donor recruitment practices. Interventional implementation research may help to improve pre- and postdonation services offered to both successful and deferred donors in the study settings.

献血者招募过程缺乏标准化:加纳两中心混合方法审计研究。
目的:撒哈拉以南非洲国家长期遭受严重的献血者短缺。临床审计是一种质量改进策略,可以识别可操作点,以改善医疗保健服务。本研究审核了加纳两家二级医疗机构的献血者招募流程,以确定可用于改善献血者血液储备的领域。方法:这是一项连续的、探索性的混合方法研究。首先,使用核对表对未来献血者与实验室人员的相互作用进行30次实时观察。随后,采用2套半结构化问卷,从135名献血者和134名实验室工作人员的角度收集了献血前筛查、献血者隐私和献血后护理等方面的数据。结果:观察性数据收集发现,在献血者招募程序中,医生之间和医生内部普遍存在差异。绝大多数潜在捐赠者是男性(91.1%),或20-39岁(80.7%)。此外,只有5.9%的潜在捐助者是自愿无偿的,而34.8%是延期的。绝大多数实验室工作人员和潜在献血者表示,在献血者筛选过程中,既没有使用献血者信息单张(分别为97.0%和98.5%),也没有使用药物延迟清单(分别为93.3%和97.8%)。此外,尽管88.2%的成功献血者表示不知道在出现不良献血后症状时可以联系任何联络人,但实验室人员表示,没有联络人来处理与成功献血者(94.8%)或延迟献血者(90.0%)相关的问题。此外,42.3%的实验室人员表示,具有永久性延迟结果的潜在献血者是完全知情的,相比之下,58.2%的实验室人员表示,在披露反应性筛查结果时感到不安。结论:采用标准操作程序可能有助于防止在献血者招募实践中机构间和医生间的差异。干预性实施研究可能有助于改善在研究环境中向成功和延期捐赠者提供的捐赠前后服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
SAGE Open Medicine
SAGE Open Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
289
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信