Background and objectives: Drugs Controller General of India (DCGI) mandates screening all donated blood for Transfusion transmissible infections (TTI) viz. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) I and II, Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), Hepatitis C virus (HCV), syphilis and malaria. Blood centres are required to make appropriate efforts to contact the reactive donors and recall them for post-donation counselling followed by referral to an assigned centre for confirmatory testing and management. Donor notification figures are lower in India compared to Western studies. This study aimed to look at impact of dual notification protocol compared to a single notification and its impact on TTI reactive donor return rate. Materials and methods: This was a retrospective single centre-based study. Donors reactive for any TTI by CLIA in duplicate, were notified and called for counselling and referral. Study population was divided into two group based on notification protocol Group 1- (1st January 2022 to 31st December 2022): three telephonic notification attempts made and letter dispatched only to those donors who could not be contacted. Group 2- (1st January 2023 to 31st December 2023): To increase donor recall, a recall letter was dispatched through speed post to all reactive donors along with three telephonic attempts to notify and recall the donor. Results: Out of total 25,115 donors, 300 donors in group 1 and 242 in group 2 were reactive for either of TTIs. Group 2 showed a high return rate (61.67%) compared to group 1 (35.3%). Most common reason for non-response was out-station donors (40%) Conclusion: Our study highlights the importance of dual notification system and repeated follow-ups to improve donor recall.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Setia et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: