File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Risk-behavior reporting by blood donors with an automated telephone system

TitleRisk-behavior reporting by blood donors with an automated telephone system
Authors
Issue Date2006
PublisherBlackwell Publishing, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/TRF
Citation
Transfusion, 2006, v. 46 n. 2, p. 289-297 How to Cite?
AbstractBACKGROUND: Donor risk-behavior assessment is important for blood safety. Few evaluations of automated telephone systems for eliciting risk exposure among voluntary blood donors have been reported. STUDY DESIGN and METHODS: A modified risk-behavior questionnaire was presented after donation via an automated telephone polling system to 805 of 15,092 Hong Kong Chinese voluntary blood donors. Risk-behavior rates were compared to those of all other donors (14,287) simultaneously completing the questionnaire in a pencil-and-paper format. RESULTS: The telephone group included proportionally more women (46.3% vs. 44.9%), previous donors (93.3% vs. 83.6%), and sexually inactive donors (66.5% vs. 71.2%) with lower educational achievement (60.7% vs. 54.5%). The telephone group demonstrated fewer missing data (mean 1.3%, range 0.4%-3.1% vs. mean 9.8%, range 8.0%-14.2%) and more complete demographic detailing, probably accounting for the demographic differences. The telephone group reported higher prevalence rates of needle or syringe sharing (1.5% vs. 0.3%), homosexual and/or bisexual intercourse (4.1% vs. 1.3%), knowing or suspecting that partner had intercourse with another during past year (12.4% vs. 8.5%), and future intention to use blood donation as a means to test for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; 19.1% vs. 13.7%). There was no difference in knowledge of the HIV window period or proportions visiting or using condoms with commercial sex workers between telephone and pencil-and-paper groups. CONCLUSION: This survey with automated telephone screening of potential blood donors revealed increased reporting of risk exposure relative to commonly used paper-and-pencil methods. This raises questions of possible underreporting of risk among blood donors screened by paper questionnaire and perhaps face-to-face interview.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/86529
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.042
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.537
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFielding, Ren_HK
dc.contributor.authorLam, THen_HK
dc.contributor.authorHedley, Aen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T09:18:10Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T09:18:10Z-
dc.date.issued2006en_HK
dc.identifier.citationTransfusion, 2006, v. 46 n. 2, p. 289-297en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0041-1132en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/86529-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Donor risk-behavior assessment is important for blood safety. Few evaluations of automated telephone systems for eliciting risk exposure among voluntary blood donors have been reported. STUDY DESIGN and METHODS: A modified risk-behavior questionnaire was presented after donation via an automated telephone polling system to 805 of 15,092 Hong Kong Chinese voluntary blood donors. Risk-behavior rates were compared to those of all other donors (14,287) simultaneously completing the questionnaire in a pencil-and-paper format. RESULTS: The telephone group included proportionally more women (46.3% vs. 44.9%), previous donors (93.3% vs. 83.6%), and sexually inactive donors (66.5% vs. 71.2%) with lower educational achievement (60.7% vs. 54.5%). The telephone group demonstrated fewer missing data (mean 1.3%, range 0.4%-3.1% vs. mean 9.8%, range 8.0%-14.2%) and more complete demographic detailing, probably accounting for the demographic differences. The telephone group reported higher prevalence rates of needle or syringe sharing (1.5% vs. 0.3%), homosexual and/or bisexual intercourse (4.1% vs. 1.3%), knowing or suspecting that partner had intercourse with another during past year (12.4% vs. 8.5%), and future intention to use blood donation as a means to test for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; 19.1% vs. 13.7%). There was no difference in knowledge of the HIV window period or proportions visiting or using condoms with commercial sex workers between telephone and pencil-and-paper groups. CONCLUSION: This survey with automated telephone screening of potential blood donors revealed increased reporting of risk exposure relative to commonly used paper-and-pencil methods. This raises questions of possible underreporting of risk among blood donors screened by paper questionnaire and perhaps face-to-face interview.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/TRFen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofTransfusionen_HK
dc.subject.meshAdolescenten_HK
dc.subject.meshAdulten_HK
dc.subject.meshAgeden_HK
dc.subject.meshBlood Banksen_HK
dc.subject.meshBlood Donorsen_HK
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshHIV Infections - blood - diagnosis - epidemiologyen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshInterviews as Topic - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshMaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshMass Screening - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_HK
dc.subject.meshQuestionnairesen_HK
dc.subject.meshRisk Factorsen_HK
dc.subject.meshRisk-Takingen_HK
dc.titleRisk-behavior reporting by blood donors with an automated telephone systemen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0041-1132&volume=46&spage=289&epage=297&date=2006&atitle=Risk-behavior+reporting+by+blood+donors+with+an+automated+telephone+systemen_HK
dc.identifier.emailFielding, R:fielding@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailLam, TH:hrmrlth@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailHedley, A:hrmrajh@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityFielding, R=rp00339en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLam, TH=rp00326en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityHedley, A=rp00357en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1537-2995.2006.00714.xen_HK
dc.identifier.pmid16441609-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33644867952en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros114185en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33644867952&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume46en_HK
dc.identifier.issue2en_HK
dc.identifier.spage289en_HK
dc.identifier.epage297en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000234856000022-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridFielding, R=7102200484en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLam, TH=7202522876en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHedley, A=7102584095en_HK
dc.identifier.citeulike480213-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats