Cargando…
Factors associated with failure of clinical screening among blood donors who have altered serological results in the Centro Regional de Hemoterapia de Ribeirão Preto
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the frequency of positive results for hepatitis B and C, HIV and syphilis in blood donations at the Centro Regional de Hemoterapia de Ribeirão Preto, to describe donors with positive results according to some demographic and socioeconomic variables, to iden...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Associação Brasileira de Hematologia e Hemoterapia
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3545426/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23323063 http://dx.doi.org/10.5581/1516-8484.20120103 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the frequency of positive results for hepatitis B and C, HIV and syphilis in blood donations at the Centro Regional de Hemoterapia de Ribeirão Preto, to describe donors with positive results according to some demographic and socioeconomic variables, to identify risk factors associated to these donors and the reasons that they were not detected during clinical screening. METHODS: A descriptive study was performed between July 1(st) 2005 and July 31(st) 2006 by interviewing 106 donorsafter medical consultations where they were informed of positive results for hepatitis B, hepatitis C, HIV or syphilis. RESULTS: There was a predominance of first-time donors, males, under 50-year olds, married individuals, from Ribeirão Preto, with elementary education, low economic status and of people who donated at the request of friends or relatives. Hepatitis C was the most frequently detected infection (56.6%), followed by hepatitis B (20.7%), HIV (12.3%) and syphilis(10.4%). About 40% of donors had omitted risk factors for different reasons: because they trusted the results of serological tests, did not feel comfortable about talking of risk factors or did not consider them relevant. Other justifications were the duration of the interview, the interviewer was unskilled, embarrassment and doubts about confidentiality. CONCLUSION: The results indicate the need for changes in the approach to clinical screening and a review of methods to attract and guide potential donors. |
---|