Cargando…
Comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [ISRCTN84429599]
BACKGROUND: Self-administered computer-assisted blood donor screening strategies may elicit more accurate responses and improve the screening process. METHODS: Randomized crossover trial comparing responses to questions on a computerized hand-held tool (HealthQuiz, or HQ), to responses on the standa...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2002
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC126208/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12191432 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-2-14 |
_version_ | 1782120317098917888 |
---|---|
author | Sellors, John W Hayward, Robert Swanson, Graham Ali, Anita Haynes, R Brian Bourque, Ronald Moore, Karen-Ann Lohfeld, Lynne Dalby, Dawn Howard, Michelle |
author_facet | Sellors, John W Hayward, Robert Swanson, Graham Ali, Anita Haynes, R Brian Bourque, Ronald Moore, Karen-Ann Lohfeld, Lynne Dalby, Dawn Howard, Michelle |
author_sort | Sellors, John W |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Self-administered computer-assisted blood donor screening strategies may elicit more accurate responses and improve the screening process. METHODS: Randomized crossover trial comparing responses to questions on a computerized hand-held tool (HealthQuiz, or HQ), to responses on the standard written instrument (Donor Health Assessment Questionnaire, or DHAQ). Randomly selected donors at 133 blood donation clinics in the area of Hamilton, Canada participated from 1995 to 1996. Donors were randomized to complete either the HQ or the DHAQ first, followed by the other instrument. In addition to responses of 'yes' and 'no' on both questionnaires, the HQ provided a response option of 'not sure'. The primary outcome was the number of additional donors deferred by the HQ. RESULTS: A total of 1239 donors participated. Seventy-one potential donors were deferred as a result of responses to the questionnaires; 56.3% (40/71) were deferred by the DHAQ, and an additional 43.7% (31/71) were deferred due to risks identified by the HQ but not by the DHAQ. Fourteen donors self-deferred; 11 indicated on the HQ that they should not donate blood on that day but did not use the confidential self-exclusion option on the DHAQ, and three used the self-exclusion option on the DHAQ but did not indicate that they should not donate blood on the HQ. The HQ identified a blood contact or risk factor for HIV/AIDS or sexually transmitted infection that was not identified by the DHAQ in 0.1% to 2.7% of donors. CONCLUSION: A self-administered computerized questionnaire may increase risk reporting by blood donors. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-126208 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2002 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-1262082002-09-18 Comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [ISRCTN84429599] Sellors, John W Hayward, Robert Swanson, Graham Ali, Anita Haynes, R Brian Bourque, Ronald Moore, Karen-Ann Lohfeld, Lynne Dalby, Dawn Howard, Michelle BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: Self-administered computer-assisted blood donor screening strategies may elicit more accurate responses and improve the screening process. METHODS: Randomized crossover trial comparing responses to questions on a computerized hand-held tool (HealthQuiz, or HQ), to responses on the standard written instrument (Donor Health Assessment Questionnaire, or DHAQ). Randomly selected donors at 133 blood donation clinics in the area of Hamilton, Canada participated from 1995 to 1996. Donors were randomized to complete either the HQ or the DHAQ first, followed by the other instrument. In addition to responses of 'yes' and 'no' on both questionnaires, the HQ provided a response option of 'not sure'. The primary outcome was the number of additional donors deferred by the HQ. RESULTS: A total of 1239 donors participated. Seventy-one potential donors were deferred as a result of responses to the questionnaires; 56.3% (40/71) were deferred by the DHAQ, and an additional 43.7% (31/71) were deferred due to risks identified by the HQ but not by the DHAQ. Fourteen donors self-deferred; 11 indicated on the HQ that they should not donate blood on that day but did not use the confidential self-exclusion option on the DHAQ, and three used the self-exclusion option on the DHAQ but did not indicate that they should not donate blood on the HQ. The HQ identified a blood contact or risk factor for HIV/AIDS or sexually transmitted infection that was not identified by the DHAQ in 0.1% to 2.7% of donors. CONCLUSION: A self-administered computerized questionnaire may increase risk reporting by blood donors. BioMed Central 2002-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC126208/ /pubmed/12191432 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-2-14 Text en Copyright © 2002 Sellors et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Sellors, John W Hayward, Robert Swanson, Graham Ali, Anita Haynes, R Brian Bourque, Ronald Moore, Karen-Ann Lohfeld, Lynne Dalby, Dawn Howard, Michelle Comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [ISRCTN84429599] |
title | Comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [ISRCTN84429599] |
title_full | Comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [ISRCTN84429599] |
title_fullStr | Comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [ISRCTN84429599] |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [ISRCTN84429599] |
title_short | Comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [ISRCTN84429599] |
title_sort | comparison of deferral rates using a computerized versus written blood donor questionnaire: a randomized, cross-over study [isrctn84429599] |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC126208/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12191432 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-2-14 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sellorsjohnw comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT haywardrobert comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT swansongraham comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT alianita comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT haynesrbrian comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT bourqueronald comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT moorekarenann comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT lohfeldlynne comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT dalbydawn comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 AT howardmichelle comparisonofdeferralratesusingacomputerizedversuswrittenblooddonorquestionnairearandomizedcrossoverstudyisrctn84429599 |