Compliance with the current 12‐month deferral for male‐to‐male sex in A ustralia

Clive R. Seed · Tarana T.A. Lucky · Daniel Waller · Handan C. Wand · J. F. Lee · Stephen Wroth +4 more

36 citations0/0 files storedVox Sanguinis

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Blood donation and transfusion practices HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions Organ Donation and Transplantation

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In Australia since 2000, donors are deferred for 12 months since last male-to-male sexual contact. There is no estimate of the prevalence of non-compliance (i.e. failure to disclose a risk during the predonation interview which would lead to deferral) with the policy in Australia; however, published studies elsewhere indicate a range of 0·8-2.3% [corrected]. We investigated the rate of, timing and motivation for non-compliance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A nationally representative sample of donors who had made a recent donation negative for transfusion-transmissible infection testing was surveyed using an anonymous, online instrument. Non-compliance was considered as a 'yes' response to the current screening question. Non-compliers were requested to define the timing of the last sexual contact relevant to their most recent donation. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to define factors associated with non-compliance. RESULTS: Of 14 476 responses from male donors, 34 (0·23%, 95% CI: 0·16-0·33%) were non-compliant of whom 24 (0·17%, 95% CI: 0·11-0·25%) had contact within 6 months of donation. Factors significantly associated with non-compliance included: multiple sexual partners, history of injecting drug use, perception of a lack of privacy during interview and preference for a computer-based questionnaire. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms high compliance (>99·7%) to the 12-month deferral for male-to-male sex in Australia providing reassuring evidence for the efficacy of the screening question. Issues of 'privacy' and 'discomfort' associated with disclosure suggest the use of validated audio computer-assisted structured interview as a possible option for improving compliance with the donor questionnaire.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 36 citations exist upstream.

References

1999Social desirability, anonymity, and internet-based questionnaires 1992Computer-Based Interview for Screening Blood Donors for Risk of HIV Transmission 2007Reducing the risk of transfusion‐transmissible viral infection through blood donor selection: the Australian experience 2000 through 2006 2011Views and experiences of men who have sex with men on the ban on blood donation: a cross sectional survey with qualitative interviews 2005The impact of male‐to‐male sexual experience on risk profiles of blood donors 2010No evidence of a significantly increased risk of transfusion‐transmitted human immunodeficiency virus infection in Australia subsequent to implementing a 12‐month deferral for men who have had sex with men (CME)2011Donor understanding and attitudes about current and potential deferral criteria for high‐risk sexual behavior 2007Men Having Sex With Men Donor Deferral Risk Assessment: An Analysis Using Risk Management Principles

Cited by

2019HIV residual risk in Canada under a three‐month deferral for men who have sex with men 2019Compliance with time‐based deferrals for men who have sex with men 2015Is Having Sex with Other Men a Risk Factor for Transfusion-Transmissible Infections in Male Blood Donors in Western Countries? A Systematic Review

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.