Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 16016

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferences
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Bhanu K Bhakhri

"The Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) has been in operation since almost a decade. It has contributed a huge number of peer reviewed articles, across a spectrum of medical disciplines, to the medical literature.
Its wide based indexing and open access publications attracts many authors as well as readers
For authors, the manuscripts can be uploaded online through an easily navigable portal, on other hand, reviewers appreciate the systematic handling of all manuscripts. The way JCDR has emerged as an effective medium for publishing wide array of observations in Indian context, I wish the editorial team success in their endeavour"



Dr Bhanu K Bhakhri
Faculty, Pediatric Medicine
Super Speciality Paediatric Hospital and Post Graduate Teaching Institute, Noida
On Sep 2018




Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dematolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2010 | Month : August | Volume : 4 | Issue : 4 | Page : 2720 - 2727

Assessment of Blood Donation Process at Four Major Centers in Jamaica

OTTEY-ALLEN A*, BURNELL G*, DUNCAN W*, SIMPSON C*, MCGROWDER D**, ALEXANDER-LINDO R L****

*Faculty of Health and Applied Sciences, University of Technology, Kingston 7, Jamaica **Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, The University of the West Indies, Kingston 7, Jamaica ***Department of Community Health and Psychiatry, Faculty of Medical Sciences, The University of the West Indies, Kingston 7, Jamaica ****Department of Basic Medical sciences (Biochemistry Section), Faculty of Medical Sciences, The University of the West Indies, Kingston 7, Jamaica

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Donovan McGrowder, Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, The University of the West Indies, Mona Campus, Kingston 7, Jamaica W.I. Tel: 876-927-1410; Fax: 876-977-1811; E-mail: dmcgrowd@yahoo.com

Abstract

Background: A major challenge for blood banks is to provide a safe and regular supply of blood to meet the patients’ needs through voluntary donation. In this study, we investigated the process of blood donation at four major donating centres in Jamaica.
Materials and Method: The research was carried out at four blood donation centres under the National Blood Bank, during routine blood collection, in a period of five working days in September 2004. It involved the systematic random sampling of 42 blood donors by using a 17-item, self-administered, anonymous questionnaire.
Results: Of the 42 donors, (51%) were voluntary and 49% were replacement donors. The motivation drivers of first time donors were as a result of certain personal considerations such as to assist family or relatives in need. Seventy six percent of donors were repeated and 24% were first timers. Four (10%) of 42 applicant donors were rejected and the most frequent reasons for deferral were high/low blood pressure and anaemia. Forty-five percent of the donors were fearful of the process and the greatest fears highlighted by donors were that of the needle size and the stinging sensation experienced upon venipuncture. The majority of the donors (78%) found that the facilities at the blood donation centres were adequate, while 22% found that they were clustered.
Conclusion: The results provide useful insights that can be used to make effective plans and to implement strategies to encourage the current donors to donate blood more often and to motivate the persons who are eligible to donate, in order to support Jamaica’s transfusion needs.

Keywords

: blood donation; volunteer, Jamaica, first-time

Introduction
The majority of the world's population has an urgent need for safe blood. Unfortunately, worldwide, there is a shortage of active blood donors to meet the increased demand for blood (1)(2). Of the estimated 80 million units of blood which are donated annually worldwide, only 38% are collected in the developing world where 82% of the world's population live (3). Efforts are continuing worldwide to establish and maintain sufficient numbers of regular, volunteer blood donors to ensure an adequate and safe blood supply. The constant concern in the efforts to meet the demands for blood is the fact that only a small percentage of the eligible population actually chooses to donate blood on a regular basis and that a significant percentage of eligible donors are deferred temporarily or permanently because of strict deferral criteria being continuously added in the name of blood safety (4). At the same time, the demand for blood and blood products in most countries continues to increase because of the rise in human life expectancy and the implementation of new and aggressive surgical and therapeutic methods requiring large quantities of blood and blood products (5).
The safety and adequacy of the blood supplies depend on the commitment of each national health authority to the establishment of a well organized, nationally coordinated blood donation program. This requires the official recognition of a specific organization with the sole responsibility of blood transfusion services, an adequate budget and a national blood policy and plan supported by a legislative and regulatory framework that governs all activities (6). The National Blood Transfusion Service (NBTS) in Jamaica has an outstanding record of providing good quality blood and blood products to the health sector. There are ten collection centres island-wide and on an average, 24,000 units of blood are collected annually by the NBTS (7). However, the national need is approximately 50,000-75,000 units. While an estimated 50,000 units of blood are needed to cover the annual demand of blood, over the years, Jamaica has been experiencing a consistent shortage. The country's annual collection is said to be an average of 22,000 to 25,000 units. In 2008, 26,300 units were collected, with only 30% from voluntary donors. The NBTS is working to meet its annual target of 50, 000 units and it encouraged persons to become voluntary donors and to play their part in achieving the target (8). There are a number of reasons why Jamaica, like many countries, would like to increase the number of regular volunteer donors. The number of donations is insufficient to cover the demand, leading to the importation of blood from abroad almost every year. Also, volunteer donors are generally associated with safer blood supplies in terms of transfusion-transmitted diseases (9). In fact, the World Health Organization and the Council of Europe recommend that blood and blood components should only be collected from voluntary, non-remunerated repeat donors [10,11]. In turn, blood donation systems that rely on volunteer blood donors who donate on a regular basis can better manage blood supplies and can schedule transfusions.
The NBTS in Jamaica consist of 10 blood collection centres, each of them operating within a certain geographical area and providing services to residents within a respective area. The centres perform the following activities: blood donor recruitment, blood collection and the preparation of blood products. Anyone willing to donate blood may do it at a centre that is of greatest convenience, during the centre's office hours. Each donated blood unit is tested against the markers of such transfusion-transmittable diseases as Hepatitis B and C, HIV and syphilis (12). The aim of this research was to investigate the process of blood donation at four major donating centres in Jamaica, as the service offered is crucial for the improvement of donor recruitment and retention effectiveness.

Material and Methods

Data collection
The standard operating procedure for the blood donation process was obtained from the NBTS or the National Blood Bank. The NBTS is the chief authority on issues related to blood donation in Jamaica. It monitors the entire process of blood donations and would therefore, have the required documentation that is used to regulate the process. These standard operating procedures were on the basis of our evaluation of the system. From these, we compared observed practices in relation to stipulated guidelines. The data collection instruments used included two separate questionnaires, one for the donors and one for the technical personnel who were responsible for the performance of the donating and the screening procedures. There were descriptive type questions on each phase of the process of blood donation. The standard operating procedures were examined to determine the guidelines that regulated these. Interview(s) were conducted with the necessary personnel (technical and managerial) to determine their competency, knowledgeable and understanding of the donation and the screening procedures and how they adhered to them.
The research was carried out at four major blood donation centres under the NBTS or the National Blood Bank; three in the Kingston Metropolitan Area and one in the rural area. The survey was conducted during routine blood collection in one week (five working days), in September, 2004. The respondents were asked to fill in a questionnaire after blood donation. The completed questionnaires were placed in a box in the blood collection centre's reception. The research involved systematic random sampling of 42 blood donors at the four centres by using a 17-item, self-administered, anonymous questionnaire. The questionnaire included questions about demographic characteristics, donor behaviour (reasons for donating etc.), intention for future donation, donation history, motivators and barriers to blood donation, donation environment, donor satisfaction with service at donation location, risk perception (perceived risks, fears) and attitudes about blood transfusion.

The study administrator sample was assessed by using a 11-item, self-administered, anonymous questionnaire, which included questions about the number of patients seen weekly, psychological assessment of the patients, criteria for rejection, the number of persons rejected and the major cause for rejection, the validation of the patients’ response to the questions and challenges encountered by each blood collection centre.
The statistical package SPSS version 10 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, USA) was used for data entry and analyses, while the charts were made by using Microsoft Office (Microsoft, Washington, USA). A p value less than 0.05 (2-tailed) was considered to be statistically significant. The frequency data were compared by the Chi-square and the Fisher’s exact tests wherever appropriate.

Results

Of the 42 donors, 51% were voluntary donors and 49% were from the patients’ family members (replacement donors) (Table/Fig 1). The motivation drivers of the first time donors were a result of certain personal considerations such as to assist family or relatives in need, to find out their blood test results, or sheer interest in trying blood donation (Table/Fig 1). The majority of the donors at the Cornwall Regional Hospital and the University Hospital of the West Indies donated blood to assist friends and families (Table/Fig 2). The larger percentage of the donors was of the male gender and had a much lower rejection rate than the female donors. Seventy six percent of the donors were repeated and 24% were first-time donors (Table/Fig 1). The Cornwall Regional Hospital had the greatest percentage of first time donors, while the University Hospital of the West Indies had the most repeated donors (Table/Fig 3). The majority of both groups included donors from 18 to 30 years of age and most were from the urban areas. Four (10%) of the 42 applicant donors were rejected (Table/Fig 4). The most frequent reasons for deferral were high/low blood pressure and anaemia.

Forty-five percent of the donors were fearful of the process. The greatest fears highlighted by donors were that of the needle size and the stinging sensation experienced upon venipuncture. Some first time donors highlighted the fear of contaminated needles being used, but were still willing to give blood for their families and friends after being reassured of the sterile practices and equipment used during the process.

The majority of the donors (78%) found that the facilities at the blood donation centres were adequate, while 22% found that they were clustered; 94% reported that the staff was attentive throughout the donation process. With respect to the donating environment, a majority (82%) found that the donating area was just right, 15% said that it was too public and 3% said that it was too private (Table/Fig 5). Eighty nine percent of the donors were encouraged by the staff to encourage others to become voluntary donors. There exists a significant statistical relationship between the place of blood donor-ship and encouraging others to become volunteers [χ2 (3) = 240.12, P < 0.0001] (Table/Fig 6). The majority (95%) of the donors did not find the interview process which was used to determine their suitability as donor candidates, intrusive upon their personal lives and indicated that they answered the questions which were asked, truthfully. When questioned about the major deterrence faced in regards to making donations, the larger percentage of interviewed donors indicated convenience. They indicated that if arrangements can be made between themselves and the donation centres to accommodate them at times of their convenience, due to their busy schedules, they would be willing to come in and donate. Some donors also indicated that they would appreciate being contacted by the relevant personnel to be informed or called in when time had elapsed for another donation to be made.Table 7 showed that the average weekly donation at each blood collection centre was 50. The average weekly rejection varied between 20-60%. The main reason for rejection was low haemoglobin levels. A psychological assessment was done on all the donors. The challenges experienced by the blood collection centres included inadequate staff, suboptimal working conditions and a low number of donors.

Discussion

The results of the present study reveal interesting facts regarding public behaviour and the perception of blood donors in Jamaica towards blood donation. If used effectively, such results can ultimately help in the effort to attract and retain more volunteer donors in general and to convert the currently large pool of replacement donors into volunteer donors. This will enable correct scheduling and adequate supplies of safer blood and blood products.
In our study, 24% were first-time donors while 76% were repeated donors. Admittedly, research has identified a number of willingness factors with respect to first-time donors. Piliavin et al. reported that social pressure, curiosity, specific replacement requests, guilt and the need to master fear were all important triggers (13). Some demographic descriptors of the typical blood donors were also available. Donors tended to be between the ages of 20 and 50, male, and generally donated via organized social or professional groups (14). Furthermore, they tended to be motivated by humanitarian or altruistic reasons (15) and by peer social pressure. Research has also shown that the predictive power of the factors associated with blood donation changes, as people progress from being first-time donors to donating on a regular basis (16). Callero and Piliavin, for example, reported that first-time donors were more influenced by external social pressures (e.g. friends) and were more concerned about pain, whereas regular donors were more likely to mention a ‘concern for others’ as a motivation to donate blood and were more concerned about having to wait (17).
In our study, 51% were voluntary donations and 49% were replacement donors. The percentage of volunteers in our study was more than the national average of 30% donors in 2008 (8). The motivation drivers of the volunteer donors were a result of certain personal considerations, such as to help family or relatives in need. In a study by Alam and Masalmeh, 63.9% of blood donors donated blood for their family members or friends (18). This response reflects a situation in which blood is donated largely for a family member in need (replacement) and implies that donation for any other reason (altruism) is a low priority. This is in accordance with studies that have observed a low percentage of voluntary donors in developing countries as compared to the more developed nations (19). A study from Saudi Arabia revealed 14.8%, 48.7% and 36.5% donors were volunteer, replacement and statutory blood donors, respectively (20). This is in contrast to an anonymous survey involving 92,581 donors in the United States, where it was found that the major reasons for donating blood were altruism (75-87%) and the awareness of the need for blood (34-43%) (21). Another study in Baltimore, Maryland Metropolitan Area, showed that low rates of volunteer blood donors by the general public have been attributed to a variety of socioeconomic, medical and attitudinal factors. Lack of awareness of the need for donation, fear of donating blood related to the perceived risk of contracting the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and loss of physical vitality after donation have been proposed as the potential reasons for ethnic and racial disparities in blood donation (22).
Results from the study addressing risk perception indicated that one-half of the donors were concerned about a range of factors discouraging blood donations (e.g. the needle size, the stinging sensation experienced upon venipuncture, etc). Some first time donors highlighted the fear of contaminated needles being used. These findings are similar to that from other studies, for example, fear of the collection process was the dominant factor for avoiding donation among young Canadian college students (23). In a study on young African American women, the most important reason for not donating was inconvenience, followed by fear of needles and taking too much time.(24) New recruitment efforts should therefore address these risk factors and ensure that the appropriate, realistic perspective is communicated to the public, so as to attract new donors.
In our study, the majority (95%) of donors did not find the interview process which was used to determine their suitability as donor candidates, intrusive upon their personal lives and indicated that they answered the questions which were asked, truthfully. The donors did not feel that the screening questionnaire contained personal questions regarding their personal life (their sexual preference, etc.). In contrast, Marantidou et al. reported that both volunteer donors and replacement donors admitted to having hidden the truth about their background (25). The authors found that the corresponding percentage is higher for replacement donors than for volunteer donors. The reason given by more than half of the volunteer donors for having hidden the truth was that they did not consider the question important. In contrast, replacement donors reported having hid the truth to ensure that their relatives or friends received the transfusion that they needed (25). Such a finding raises concern and highlights the dangers which are related to the replacement blood donations, both in the form of risk to those being transfused, as well as the risk to the donors. The fact that some people hide the truth about their background shows that more attention must be given to the medical history by educating the staff in personalizing the manner in which they solicit information, depending on the educational level of the donor. These findings must be evaluated in combination with the fact that these are commonly recognized incentives for donation in other countries as well (26).
There are no donor risks as long as the international standards for blood collection are observed. These standards prescribe blood collection volume and frequency in relation to donor gender and weight, age limits and donor qualification (observance of set eligibility criteria). In addition, the collection facilities must comply with specific hygiene/sanitation, safety and comfort standards. The blood services personnel must be trained, courteous and adept at interpersonal communication. In this study, the administrators reported that they adhered to the protocol at all times and observed international regulations in collecting blood from donors. Furthermore, the majority of the donors (78%) found that the facilities at the blood donation centres were adequate, while 22% found that they were clustered; ninety four percent of the donors reported that the staff was attentive throughout the donation process. With respect to the donating environment, the majority (82%) of the donors found that the donating area was just right, 15% found it too public and 3% found it too private. Eighty seven percent were asked by the staff to encourage others to become voluntary donors. Multiple aspects of the donation experience influenced donor return behavior, including staff treatment and waiting time (27). Retention of the donors was also largely dependent on donor satisfaction with the blood collection services (28). So, it is vital to help them feel at home at the blood collection centres. Another crucial aspect is making the donors feel that their blood donations are useful for the community and are appreciated by it.
In our study, the majority of the donors indicated the major deterrence faced in regards to making donations is convenience. They indicated that if arrangements should be made between themselves and the donation centres to accommodate them at times of their convenience, due to their busy schedules, they would be willing to come in and donate. Some donors also indicated that they would appreciate being contacted by the relevant personnel to be informed or called in when time had elapsed for another donation to be made. Our efforts should therefore definitely ensure that reminding mechanisms are in place and should pay particular attention to reaching eligible blood donors who are willing to donate, but simply need to be reminded. One way to increase the frequency of the donations is through more effective communication with the donors. Our current efforts must be rendered more methodical and accomplished through a wider range of tools (e.g. telephonic or electronic reminders, via television, advertisements and letters). Other factors such as the distance of the donation center or hospitaldo not seem to be significant barriers to blood donation, as described in other studies (29). It is important to know that people in Jamaica can donate blood at any hospital and the donation centres are generally open all day.

Conclusion

We believe that the results provide useful insights that can be used to make effective plans and to implement strategies to encourage the current donors to donate blood more often and to motivate persons who are eligible to donate to support Jamaica’s transfusion needs. Greater emphasis on the social benefits of blood donation may possibly lead to the higher involvement of organizations and higher education establishments. Promotional activities of blood donation should also be adapted to rapidly evolving communication technologies. Further research should be done into the attitude to the donation issue among the non-donor population, which would enable to identify predominant prejudices or fears that contribute to the development of negative attitudes to blood donation. This information is relevant in the development of information packages for donor recruitment campaigns, as well as for the formation of a positive attitude towards blood donation.

References

1.
Reid M, Wood A. Motivating non-donors to donate blood. In Shaw, R.N., Adam, S., McDonald, H., (Eds.). Proceedings of the Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference. Melbourne: Bowater School of Management and Marketing, Deakin University, 2002:3411-7.
2.
Gillespie TW, Hillyer CD. Blood donors and factors impacting the blood donation decision. Transfusion Medicine Reviews 2002;16:115-30.
3.
World Health Organization/Western Pacific Region. Blood safety and voluntary Donations. 10 June 2004 http://www.wpro.who.int/media_centre/fact_sheets/fs_20040610.htm
4.
Riley W, Schwei M, McCullough J. The United States_ potential blood donor pool: estimating the prevalence of donor-exclusion factors on the pool of potential donors. Transfusion 2007;47:1180-8.
5.
Mathew S.M, King MR, Glynn SK, Dietz SK, Caswell SL, Schreiber GB. Opinions about donating blood among those who never gave and those who stopped: a focus group assessment. Transfusion 2007;47:729-35.
6.
WHO. Global database on blood safety. Summary report, WHO. Blood transfusion safety; 1998-1999. Available from: URL: http://www.who.int/bloodsafety/global_data base/en.
7.
Ministry of Health, Jamaica. National Transfusion Service 1999. Ministry of Health, Jamaica;1999;414-420
8.
Jamaica Information Service. Ministry of Health: June 14 is World Blood Donor Day. June 12, 2009. http://www.jis.gov.jm/minhealth/html/20090612t170000-0500_20011_jis_june_14_ is_world_blood_donor_day.asp.
9.
Liu TC, Kuperan P, Tan C, Lin TK, Lee SH. Structuring a safer donor-replacement program. Transfusion 1998;38:368-372.
10.
Dhingra N. Blood safety in developing world and WHO initiatives. Vox Sanguinis 2002;83:173-7.
11.
Council of Europe. Guide to the Preparation, Use and Quality Assurance of Blood Components. 9. Strasburg: Council of Europe Publishing; 2003. Recommendation: Appendix 2, R. 2003;(95):15.
12.
Dodd, RY, Notari, EP, Stramer, SL. Current prevalence and incidence of infectious disease markers and estimated window period risk in the American Red Cross blood donor population. Transfusion 2002;42:975.
13.
Piliavin JA. Why do they give the gift of life: a review of research on blood donors since 1977. Transfusion 1990;30:444-59.
14.
Boulware LE, Ratner LE, Ness PM, Cooper LA, Campbell-Lee S, LaVeist TA, Powe NR. The contribution of sociodemographic, medical and attitudinal factors to blood donation among the general public. Transfusion 2002;42:669-78.
15.
Glynn SA, Kleinman SH, Schreiber GB, Zuck T, McCombs S, Bethel J, Garratty G, Williams AE. Motivations to donate blood: demographic comparisons. Transfusion 2002;42:216-25.
16.
Allen CT, Machleit KA, Kleine S. A comparison of attitudes and emotions as predictors of behaviour at diverse levels of behavioural experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 1992;18:493-504.
17.
Callero P, Piliavin J. Developing a commitment to blood donation: the impact of one's first experience. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1983:13:1-16.
18.
Alam M, Masalmeh B. Knowledge, attitude and practices regarding blood donation among Saudi population. Saudi Medical Journal 2004;25:318-21.
19.
Wake D, Cutting W. Blood transfusion in developing countries: Problems, priorities and practicalities. Trop Doct 1998;28:4-8.
20.
Bashawri LA. Pattern of blood procurement, ordering and utilization in a University Hospital in Eastern Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J 2002;23:555-61.
21.
Glynn SA, Kleinman SH, Schreiber GB, Zuck T, Combs SM, Bethel J, et al. Motivations to donate blood: demographic comparisons. Transfusion 2002; 42:216-25.
22.
Boulware LE, Ratner LE, Ness PM, Cooper LA, Campell-Lee S, LaVeist TA, et al. The contribution of sociodemographic, medical, and attitudinal factors to blood donation among the general public: Transfusion 2002;42:669-78.
23.
Hupfer ME, Taylor TW, Letwin JA. Understanding Canadian student motivations and beliefs about giving blood. Transfusion 2005;45:149-62.
24.
Grossman B, Watkins AR, Fleming F, DeBaun MR. Barriers and motivators to blood and cord blood donations in young African-American women. Am J Hematol 2005;78:198-202.
25.
Marantidou O, Loukopoulou L, Zervou E, Martinis G, Egglezou A, Fountouli P, et al. Factors that motivate and hinder blood donation in Greece. Transfus Med 2007; 17:443-50.
26.
Sanchez AM, Ameti DI, Schreiber GB, Thomson RA, Lo A, Bethel J, et al. The potential impact of incentives on future blood donation behaviour. Transfusion 2001;41:172-8.
27.
Gillespie T, Newman JL, Bellamy M. et al. National study of blood donation decision-making: Current and lapsed donors. Transfusion 2002;42:122s-3s.
28.
Politis C. Blood donation systems as an integral part of the health system. Arch Hellen Med 2000;17:354-7.
29.
Schreiber GB, Schlumpf KS, Glynn SA, et al. Convenience, the ban of our existence, and other barriers to donating. Transfusion 2006;46:545-53.

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com