8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The impact of simple donor education on donor behavioral deferral and infectious disease rates in São Paulo, Brazil.

      Transfusion
      Adult, Aged, Blood Banks, standards, Blood Donors, education, Blood Transfusion, adverse effects, Brazil, epidemiology, Communicable Diseases, Confidentiality, Disease Transmission, Infectious, statistics & numerical data, Educational Status, Female, HIV Infections, prevention & control, transmission, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pamphlets, Risk Assessment, Risk Management, methods, Urban Population

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Studies have shown that human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) residual risk is higher in Brazilian than in US and European blood donors, probably due to failure to defer at-risk individuals in Brazil. This study assessed the impact of an educational brochure in enhancing blood donors' knowledge about screening test window phase and reducing at-risk individuals from donating. This trial compared an educational intervention with a blood center's usual practice. The brochure was distributed in alternating months to all donors. After donating, sampled participants completed two questions about their HIV window period knowledge. The impact on HIV risk deferral, leaving without donation, confidential unit exclusion (CUE) use, and test positivity was also analyzed. From August to November 2007 we evaluated 33,940 donations in the main collection center of Fundação Pró-Sangue/Hemocentro de São Paulo in São Paulo, Brazil. A significant (p < 0.001) pamphlet effect was found on correct responses to both questions assessing HIV window phase knowledge (68.1% vs. 52.9%) and transfusion risk (91.1% vs. 87.2%). After adjusting for sex and age, the pamphlet effect was strongest for people with more than 8 years of education. There was no significant pamphlet effect on HIV risk deferral rate, leaving without donation, use of CUE, or infectious disease rates. While the educational pamphlet increased window period knowledge, contrary to expectations this information alone was not enough to make donors self-defer or acknowledge their behavioral risk.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article