How do blood donors interpret the Swedish donor history questionnaire?

Abstract

Background and Objectives The blood donor history questionnaire, together with blood samples, aims to ensure that blood donation is safe for both donor and recipient. Donors’ interpretation of the questions is of the utmost importance. The objective of this study was to examine how blood donors in Sweden interpret the donor history questionnaire and to assess the need for rewording any questions. Materials and Methods Twelve cognitive interviews were conducted with blood donors. A survey was distributed at blood centres in two regions in Sweden. Altogether, 671 donors returned the survey. Results Although a majority claimed to understand the donor history questions, not all donors reported on their medications or healthcare episodes. There was a significant correlation between donors who did not report on medications and the third of donors who did not read the donor information. The concept of being in full health varied for different donors and many were uncertain about the definition of new sexual partner. Conclusion Overall, the blood donors were satisfied with the readability of the questions. However, some questions turned out to be more difficult to interpret, and may need to be reworded. The study demonstrates the need for easy access to blood safety information.

Validation of a standardized donor health questionnaire across substances of human origin

“…questions regarding risk behaviour) [21,22]. Hence, it is not only important that the content is properly clarified, but also that the participants are informed of the reason for certain questions [21,22]. Our results show that the level of knowledge significantly influenced the level of honesty of the questions on risk behaviour, highlighting the need for careful information of the donors from the donation establishments.…”

“…The issue of blood donation and social desirability is addressed in the literature [25], but much more research is needed, especially on the effect of a confidential environment on the honesty of answers. While, based on previous research [8,20,21], we have not focused on culturally different countries, deviating results in other countries cannot be excluded and a generalization of our results needs to be further investigated.…”

“…A suitable alternative could be short information videos on the donation service website, which can either be viewed as preparation at home or at the collection centre [21,23]. The latter has already been implemented in Sweden [21].…”

“…questions regarding health) [21] or participants may not understand the necessity of the question and why an honest answer is important (i.e. questions regarding risk behaviour) [21,22]. Hence, it is not only important that the content is properly clarified, but also that the participants are informed of the reason for certain questions [21,22].…”

“…Our results show that the level of knowledge significantly influenced the level of honesty of the questions on risk behaviour, highlighting the need for careful information of the donors from the donation establishments. Previous studies have shown that although the screening educational materials are read by the donors, they are often skimmed or not read with sufficient concentration to actually understand the risks that can arise from dishonest answers [21,23,24]. A suitable alternative could be short information videos on the donation service website, which can either be viewed as preparation at home or at the collection centre [21,23].…”