Behaviour based screening questions and potential donation loss using the "for the assessment of individualised risk" screening criteria: A Canadian perspective.

Transfusion Medicine (Oxford, England) Pub Date : 2022-10-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-20 DOI:10.1111/tme.12888
Niamh Caffrey, Mindy Goldman, Antoine Lewin, Lori Osmond, Sheila F O'Brien
{"title":"Behaviour based screening questions and potential donation loss using the \"for the assessment of individualised risk\" screening criteria: A Canadian perspective.","authors":"Niamh Caffrey,&nbsp;Mindy Goldman,&nbsp;Antoine Lewin,&nbsp;Lori Osmond,&nbsp;Sheila F O'Brien","doi":"10.1111/tme.12888","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To reduce the risk of HIV transmission through transfusion, gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) are deferred from donating blood in many countries for varying lengths of time after having sex with another man. In 2021, screening algorithms to identify high-risk sexual behaviours using gender-neutral criteria (i.e., without any question on MSM or time deferral for MSM) were implemented in the United Kingdom based on recommendations in a report from the FAIR (For the Assessment of Individualised Risk) steering group.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study examines the potential donation loss expected with these criteria if implemented in Canada.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Responses from blood donors regarding engagement in behaviours such as chemsex and anal sex with a new or multiple partners within 3 months of donation were collected using an on-site paper questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Applying the FAIR criteria resulted in donation loss of 1.0% (95% CI: 0.8% - 1.1%). Donation loss would be higher amongst younger donors aged 17-25 (2.0%, 95% CI: 1.6% - 2.3%). Overall, 20% of donors reported feeling uncomfortable answering study questions but only 2.0% said it would stop them from donating.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Donation loss could be compensated by newly eligible gbMSM and with increased recruitment and encouraging donation from infrequent donors.</p>","PeriodicalId":442504,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion Medicine (Oxford, England)","volume":" ","pages":"422-427"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion Medicine (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/tme.12888","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Background: To reduce the risk of HIV transmission through transfusion, gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) are deferred from donating blood in many countries for varying lengths of time after having sex with another man. In 2021, screening algorithms to identify high-risk sexual behaviours using gender-neutral criteria (i.e., without any question on MSM or time deferral for MSM) were implemented in the United Kingdom based on recommendations in a report from the FAIR (For the Assessment of Individualised Risk) steering group.

Objectives: This study examines the potential donation loss expected with these criteria if implemented in Canada.

Methods: Responses from blood donors regarding engagement in behaviours such as chemsex and anal sex with a new or multiple partners within 3 months of donation were collected using an on-site paper questionnaire.

Results: Applying the FAIR criteria resulted in donation loss of 1.0% (95% CI: 0.8% - 1.1%). Donation loss would be higher amongst younger donors aged 17-25 (2.0%, 95% CI: 1.6% - 2.3%). Overall, 20% of donors reported feeling uncomfortable answering study questions but only 2.0% said it would stop them from donating.

Conclusion: Donation loss could be compensated by newly eligible gbMSM and with increased recruitment and encouraging donation from infrequent donors.

基于行为的筛查问题和使用“个体化风险评估”筛查标准的潜在捐赠损失:加拿大视角。
背景:为了减少通过输血传播艾滋病毒的风险,在许多国家,男同性恋者、双性恋者和其他男男性行为者(gbMSM)在与另一名男子发生性行为后,在不同的时间内推迟献血。2021年,根据FAIR(个性化风险评估)指导小组报告中的建议,英国实施了使用性别中立标准(即对男男性行为没有任何疑问或推迟男男性行为)识别高风险性行为的筛查算法。目的:本研究考察了如果在加拿大实施这些标准所预期的潜在捐赠损失。方法:采用现场纸质问卷收集献血者在献血3个月内与新伴侣或多名伴侣发生化学性交和肛交等行为的回答。结果:应用FAIR标准导致1.0%的捐赠损失(95% CI: 0.8% - 1.1%)。17-25岁的年轻捐赠者的捐赠损失更高(2.0%,95% CI: 1.6% - 2.3%)。总体而言,20%的捐赠者表示在回答研究问题时感到不舒服,但只有2.0%的人表示这会阻止他们捐赠。结论:新增符合条件的gbMSM、增加招募和鼓励不常献血者捐献可以弥补捐献损失。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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