Deferral of males who had sex with other males

Benjamin, Richard J.; Bianco, Celso; Goldman, Mindy; Seed, Clive R.; Yang, Hwa-Mi; Lee, J.; Keller, A. J.; Wendel, Sarah K.; Biagini, S.; Murray, Jeannie; Devine, Dana V.; Zhu, Ying; Turek, Paul J.; Moftah, Faten; Kullaste, R.; Pillonel, Josiane; Danic, Bruno; Bigey, F.; Folléa, Gilles; Seifried, Erhard; Mueller, Mogens; Lin, Che-Kit; Makroo, Raj Nath; Grazzini, Giuliano; Pupella, Simonetta; Velati, Claudio; Tadokoro, Kiyoshi; Lindoro, Amalia Bravo; Gonzalez, Anthony; Giner, V. T.; Flanagan, Peter; Olaussen, Richard W.; Łętowska, Magdalena; Rosiek, Aleksandra; Pogłód, Ryszard; Жибурт, Е Б; Mali, Prajita; Rožman, Primož; Gulube, Sam; Izaguirre, E. Castro; Ekermo, Bengt; Barnes, S. M.; McLaughlin, Lisa; Eder, Anne F.; Panzer, Stephanie; Reesink, H. W.

doi:10.1111/j.1423-0410.2011.1489.x

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Advocates have argued for a sex‐neutral approach to move away from the time‐based deferral for MSM, which groups all recent MSM in a high‐risk category 6 . Although a few countries, 4 notably Italy and Spain, have sex‐neutral approaches, there is scant literature assessing the impact of implementing these questions on currently eligible donors and the adequacy of the blood supply. This is in terms of both deferral of currently eligible donors and discomfort and unwillingness to donate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The “no more than one partner” criterion used in France was implemented based on presumed risk reduction rather than empirical evidence. In Italy and Spain, donors are interviewed by a health professional and those with risk factors are classified as being at risk or being at high risk 3,4 . The criteria do not consider whether the donor's partner is male or female.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Different strategies for assessing high‐risk behaviors exist. Some countries such as Italy and Spain assess donors in a detailed personal interview and use criteria such as sex with a new partner, multiple partners, or a casual partner whose sexual history is unknown, regardless of whether the partner is same sex or opposite sex 3,4 . An advantage of this sex‐neutral approach is that it does not stigmatize gay men by categorizing all sexually active MSM as being in a high‐risk category.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Donor screening question alternatives to men who have sex with men time deferral: Potential impact on donor deferral and discomfort

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Alternative screening questions could permit low‐risk men who have sex with men (MSM) to donate blood without a time deferral. We performed a study to determine the proportion of current donors who may be deferred by various questions and their comfort with them. Study Design and Methods Donors attending collection sites in Canada in January and February 2018 were offered one of two questionnaires but not both. Questionnaire 1 asked about risk behaviors; Questionnaire 2 rated comfort with the questions. Volunteers uncomfortable with questions participated in short qualitative telephone interviews to understand reasons. Quantitative data were analyzed using χ2 statistics. Results Of 36 241 donors attending, 31 904 (88%, Period 1) completed Questionnaire 1; of 34 947, a total of 30 278 (87%, Period 2) completed Questionnaire 2; 294 completed an interview. In the past 3 months 3.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1%‐3.6%) had more than one partner; 6.0% (95% CI, 5.7%‐6.2%) had a new partner; 6.7% (95% CI, 6.4%‐6.9%) were in a nonexclusive relationship; 11.2% (95% CI, 10.9%‐11.6%) had at least one of these; 3.7% (95% CI, 3.4%‐3.9%) had anal sex; and 62.8% (95% CI, 62.2%‐63.3%) had condomless sex. More than 6% were uncomfortable with each question, but more (17.2%; 95% CI, 16.8%‐17.7%) were uncomfortable with anal sex. Key reasons for discomfort were questions being too personal and unclear safety benefit. Conclusion Most donors are comfortable answering alternative questions (except very personal ones) but question the benefit. Implementing alternative questions would result in substantive deferrals. Other policies such as using an MSM capture question to ask additional questions only to MSM should be considered.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Donor screening question alternatives to men who have sex with men time deferral: Potential impact on donor deferral and discomfort

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With the exception of the Class 3 profile, with blood donors who are engaged in mixed high‐ and low‐risk behaviors, the study did find compelling results for questions that could reliably differentiate between lower‐ and higher‐risk blood donors, an unresolved challenge in donor selection. A tendency emerging in some countries, such as Spain, Italy, and Portugal, is to select blood donors based on individual risk assessments that can include partners with unknown risk behaviors, new or multiple partners, and not to consider just if a sexual partner is of the same or opposite sex . We do not know what the impact of this approach would be in Brazilian blood services.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As in Australia, Canada, the United States, and several European countries, the Brazilian Ministry of Health changed the regulation for permanent deferral from donation for men who have sex with men (MSM) to a 1‐year deferral since their last sexual contact . In the United Kingdom, MSM donation deferral is now 3 months after the last sexual contact.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social and behavioral characteristics of male blood donors and their sexual partners: an analysis to define risk subsets

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Men who have sex with men in Brazil are deferred from donation for 1 year since their last sexual contact. Legal proceedings in front of the Brazilian Supreme Court could compel blood collection agencies to discontinue use of sexual orientation questions. METHODS: Data from male participants in a completedHIV risk factor case-control study were used to evaluate whether it is possible to differentiate donors at lower and higher risk for HIV using two analytical approaches: latent class and random forest analyses. R egulations governing blood donation and transfusion in Brazil are very similar to those in the United States and Europe, and internationally accepted procedures and guidelines are used as reference in the development of Brazilian rules and practice guidelines. However, the risk of HIV transmission by blood transfusion ABBREVIATIONS: ACASI = audio computer-assisted structured interview; IVDU = intravenous drug user; LCA = latent class analysis; MSM = men who have sex with men; PPVs = positive predictive values.

show abstract

Compliance and attitudes of blood donors following transitioning from permanent to 12‐month deferral of men who have sex with men in Hong Kong

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives Blood safety hinges not just on the scientific rationale for deferral period but potential donors' compliance with the prevailing policy. This study aimed to investigate donors' awareness, attitudes and compliance with the two-phased policy implementation of time-limited deferral for men who have sex with men (MSM) in Hong Kong. Materials and MethodsThree rounds of questionnaire survey were conducted between July 2017 and June 2019 covering the periods of pre-implementation (Round A), post-implementation without and with pre-donation questionnaire revision (Round B and C). Chi-square test and multivariable regression analysis were performed.Results Of 3085 donors recruited, 968, 1036 and 1081 completed the surveys in Round A, B and C, respectively. The non-compliance rate of MSM remained stable at 0Á6% (3/497), 0Á4% (2/551) and 0Á5% (3/587) among male donors in Round A, B and C, respectively. Two MSM donors from Round C complying with the prevailing policy were identified. About two-thirds (60Á7%) of respondents from Round B and C were unaware of the policy change. Overall, over 80% were either neutral or positive about the change. ConclusionOur study showed a consistently low non-compliance rate of MSM over the three periods. The generally high level of acceptance of time-limited deferral among donors lends support to science-based policy development to protect blood safety. The identification of compliant MSM donors suggests that the 12-month deferral is effective and acceptable to MSM. With a deferral period far exceeding the window period, it is a step towards a more equitable policy.

show abstract

Deferral of males who had sex with other males

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Donor screening question alternatives to men who have sex with men time deferral: Potential impact on donor deferral and discomfort

Donor screening question alternatives to men who have sex with men time deferral: Potential impact on donor deferral and discomfort

Social and behavioral characteristics of male blood donors and their sexual partners: an analysis to define risk subsets

Compliance and attitudes of blood donors following transitioning from permanent to 12‐month deferral of men who have sex with men in Hong Kong

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About