Structuring a Safer Donor-Replacement Program

Replacement donors are more likely than volunteer donors to have positive or abnormal tests for transfusion-transmissible disease. In an effort to increase the donor pool, workers sought to identify a safer replacement-donor subgroup that may be acceptable for routine donations. STUDY DESIGN AND MET...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Liu, T. C., Kuperan, P, TAN, C., LIN, Ting Kwong, Lee, S H
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 1998
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soe_research/114
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.soe_research-1113
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.soe_research-11132010-09-23T05:48:03Z Structuring a Safer Donor-Replacement Program Liu, T. C. Kuperan, P TAN, C. LIN, Ting Kwong Lee, S H Replacement donors are more likely than volunteer donors to have positive or abnormal tests for transfusion-transmissible disease. In an effort to increase the donor pool, workers sought to identify a safer replacement-donor subgroup that may be acceptable for routine donations. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In a retrospective review and cohort study, the replacement-donor effect was separated from the new-donor effect. The relative effect the replacement donor has on the risk of transfusion-transmissible diseases, donor retention, and frequency of returning donations was then quantified by comparison against the effect of repeat volunteer donors. RESULTS: The replacement donor had 3.1 times the risk and 0.72 times the donor retention rate and made 0.81 times as many returning donations as the repeat volunteer donor. The figures for the new-donor effect were similar. The two risks were additive, making a new replacement donor particularly hazardous. If replacement donations only from repeat replacement donors were considered, the donor risk and the number of donations per returning donor were made comparable to those for the general (combined) volunteer donor. CONCLUSION: The negative effect of the replacement donor is similar in magnitude to that of the new volunteer donor. A replacement-donation program targeting repeat replacement donors has an acceptable risk profile and may be a valuable adjunct to the collection of blood from general volunteer donors. 1998-04-01T08:00:00Z text https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soe_research/114 info:doi/10.1046/j.1537-2995.1998.38498257375.x Research Collection School Of Economics eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Health Economics
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic Health Economics
spellingShingle Health Economics
Liu, T. C.
Kuperan, P
TAN, C.
LIN, Ting Kwong
Lee, S H
Structuring a Safer Donor-Replacement Program
description Replacement donors are more likely than volunteer donors to have positive or abnormal tests for transfusion-transmissible disease. In an effort to increase the donor pool, workers sought to identify a safer replacement-donor subgroup that may be acceptable for routine donations. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In a retrospective review and cohort study, the replacement-donor effect was separated from the new-donor effect. The relative effect the replacement donor has on the risk of transfusion-transmissible diseases, donor retention, and frequency of returning donations was then quantified by comparison against the effect of repeat volunteer donors. RESULTS: The replacement donor had 3.1 times the risk and 0.72 times the donor retention rate and made 0.81 times as many returning donations as the repeat volunteer donor. The figures for the new-donor effect were similar. The two risks were additive, making a new replacement donor particularly hazardous. If replacement donations only from repeat replacement donors were considered, the donor risk and the number of donations per returning donor were made comparable to those for the general (combined) volunteer donor. CONCLUSION: The negative effect of the replacement donor is similar in magnitude to that of the new volunteer donor. A replacement-donation program targeting repeat replacement donors has an acceptable risk profile and may be a valuable adjunct to the collection of blood from general volunteer donors.
format text
author Liu, T. C.
Kuperan, P
TAN, C.
LIN, Ting Kwong
Lee, S H
author_facet Liu, T. C.
Kuperan, P
TAN, C.
LIN, Ting Kwong
Lee, S H
author_sort Liu, T. C.
title Structuring a Safer Donor-Replacement Program
title_short Structuring a Safer Donor-Replacement Program
title_full Structuring a Safer Donor-Replacement Program
title_fullStr Structuring a Safer Donor-Replacement Program
title_full_unstemmed Structuring a Safer Donor-Replacement Program
title_sort structuring a safer donor-replacement program
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 1998
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soe_research/114
_version_ 1770569049950912512