Cargando…
Understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study
BACKGROUND: The reasons why deferral from blood donation reduces the likelihood of future return remain unclear. This aim of this study was to investigate possible reasons why deferral has such a dramatic impact on donation patterns. METHODS: Qualitative methods were used to explore donors’ motivati...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3547734/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23227817 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-1063 |
_version_ | 1782256215420567552 |
---|---|
author | Hillgrove, Tessa L Doherty, Kathleen V Moore, Vivienne M |
author_facet | Hillgrove, Tessa L Doherty, Kathleen V Moore, Vivienne M |
author_sort | Hillgrove, Tessa L |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The reasons why deferral from blood donation reduces the likelihood of future return remain unclear. This aim of this study was to investigate possible reasons why deferral has such a dramatic impact on donation patterns. METHODS: Qualitative methods were used to explore donors’ motivations to give blood, their experiences of temporary deferral, and their intentions to return once eligible. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 donors in the two weeks following a temporary deferral due to a low haemoglobin concentration. The Framework approach was used to analyse data and identify themes associated with prompt return, ascertained from Blood Service records. RESULTS: We found that, predominantly, individuals give blood because it represents an easy and convenient way to help others, and provides personal rewards, such as enhancing positive self-concepts and valuable knowledge about health. Deferral disrupts the habit of regular donation, and additionally, introduces an element of practical and emotional hassle to what is generally seen as an undemanding activity. Return after deferral was related to four aspects of a person and their context: an individual’s other obligations, especially parenting; whether donation arrangements were facilitated by a range of supports; the presence of a strong “blood donor” identity; and whether deferral left the donor feeling valued and appreciated. CONCLUSIONS: Aspects of the deferral process need to be improved to ensure individuals feel valued, and continued attention should be given to the convenience of donation, especially for those with competing obligations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3547734 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-35477342013-02-12 Understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study Hillgrove, Tessa L Doherty, Kathleen V Moore, Vivienne M BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The reasons why deferral from blood donation reduces the likelihood of future return remain unclear. This aim of this study was to investigate possible reasons why deferral has such a dramatic impact on donation patterns. METHODS: Qualitative methods were used to explore donors’ motivations to give blood, their experiences of temporary deferral, and their intentions to return once eligible. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 donors in the two weeks following a temporary deferral due to a low haemoglobin concentration. The Framework approach was used to analyse data and identify themes associated with prompt return, ascertained from Blood Service records. RESULTS: We found that, predominantly, individuals give blood because it represents an easy and convenient way to help others, and provides personal rewards, such as enhancing positive self-concepts and valuable knowledge about health. Deferral disrupts the habit of regular donation, and additionally, introduces an element of practical and emotional hassle to what is generally seen as an undemanding activity. Return after deferral was related to four aspects of a person and their context: an individual’s other obligations, especially parenting; whether donation arrangements were facilitated by a range of supports; the presence of a strong “blood donor” identity; and whether deferral left the donor feeling valued and appreciated. CONCLUSIONS: Aspects of the deferral process need to be improved to ensure individuals feel valued, and continued attention should be given to the convenience of donation, especially for those with competing obligations. BioMed Central 2012-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3547734/ /pubmed/23227817 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-1063 Text en Copyright © 2012 Hillgrove et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Hillgrove, Tessa L Doherty, Kathleen V Moore, Vivienne M Understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study |
title | Understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study |
title_full | Understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study |
title_fullStr | Understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study |
title_full_unstemmed | Understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study |
title_short | Understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study |
title_sort | understanding non-return after a temporary deferral from giving blood: a qualitative study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3547734/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23227817 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-1063 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hillgrovetessal understandingnonreturnafteratemporarydeferralfromgivingbloodaqualitativestudy AT dohertykathleenv understandingnonreturnafteratemporarydeferralfromgivingbloodaqualitativestudy AT mooreviviennem understandingnonreturnafteratemporarydeferralfromgivingbloodaqualitativestudy |