Suchergebnisse

Background: We explore the roles of trust, distrust, and the prevailing socio-political context to better understand why people from ethnic minority communities are less likely to be blood donors compared to people from White communities. Recruiting more ethnic minority donors will enhance representativeness, reduce inequality, and help meet the clinical need to increase the proportion of blood with Ro Kell antigen to treat Sickle Cell Disease (SCD).Study Design and Methods: A 2 (Donor-Status: current vs non-donors) by 4 (Ethnicity: White vs, Asian, vs Mixed Race vs Black people) quasi-experiment (N = 981) was conducted to examine perceptions of trust/distrust and their influence on willingness to donate blood, within the socio-political context of the Windrush scandal and Brexit.Results: We identified five domains of trust ('National Health Service [NHS] and staff', 'NHS Blood and Transplant', 'outgroups', 'individuals', and 'politics'), and a single domain of conditional distrust domain. Trust across all the domains was lower, and 'conditional distrust' higher for ethnic minorities. Trust in 'individuals' and 'NHSBT' predicted willingness to donate in non-donors from ethnic minorities and White non-donors, respectively. Concerns about the Windrush scandal were related to lower political trust. Viewing Brexit as 'positive for the UK' was related to lower trust across domains and reduced willingness to donate in White non-donors through its influence on reduced trust in NHSBT.Conclusion: Distinct domains of trust and distrust are identified, and targeting 'trust in others' through conditional cooperation is recommended as a strategy to increase donor numbers from ethnic minority communities.

BACKGROUND: In non-endemic countries, malaria risk is addressed by selectively testing or deferring at-risk donors. These policy decisions were made using a variety of decision-making frameworks prior to the development of the Alliance of Blood Operators Risk Based Decision-Making Framework. It is unclear whether the range of items assessed in the decision-making process would be increased if the Framework were used. We compared assessments considered in France, England and Australia for decisions to implement selective testing, plus donor selection criteria (Canada and the USA included) with those recommended by the Framework. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Elements of the Framework were identified: the intervention, safety threat, availability threat, donor impact, financial implications, risk communication, stakeholder and regulatory aspects. Decisions about selective testing and donor selection criteria were analysed separately. Assessments were compared against elements of the Framework and the level of concern for considerations rated. RESULTS: Sufficiency of the blood supply (plus safety in France) were the drivers for selective testing; main trade-offs were high operational impact and cost. In three donor criteria examples, transfusion-transmitted malaria cases prompted the change. Social concerns were high in France and Australia, political/regulatory concerns influenced decisions in France, Australia and Canada, while sufficiency was a consideration in Canada and the USA. Decision trade-offs involved moderate operational impact. DISCUSSION: The assessments considered in each country were generally consistent with the assessments recommended by the Framework. When data supported quantified risk assessment, safety and operational feasibility had the greatest weight. When risk was not well defined, contextual factors such as social and political concern had greater weight.