ปฏิกิริยาจากการบริจาคโลหิต ณ ศูนย์บริการโลหิตแห่งชาติ สภากาชาดไทย และหน่วยเคลื่อนที่
Keywords:
ผู้บริจาคโลหิต, การบริจาคโลหิต, การเกิดปฏิกิริยาจากการบริจาคโลหิต, Blood donor, Blood donation, Adverse donor reactionsAbstract
Abstract: The National Blood Center (NBC), Thai Red Cross Society is responsible for providing safe and adequate blood supply. The blood selection is aimed for the safety of both donors and recipients and minimized adverse donor reaction (ADR). The objective of this study was to monitor adverse reactions and to improve donor care. We collected and analyzed the data from blood donors and their reverse reactions (ADR) from October 1, 2012 –September 30, 2011. A total of 1,129,526 donations were included in the study. There were 505,816 donations at NBC and 623,708 donations at mobile sites. All donors passed the NBC selection criteria and were requested to drink about 300 – 400 mL. of water before donation. The ADR was classified into local and general reactions. For local ADR, they were hematoma, problem with blood flow, nerve injury, arterial puncture, rash and systemic vasovagal reaction (VVR) which are divided into mind, moderate, severe and VVR with injury. We found that ADR at mobile units occurred more frequent than at the NBC, 4.63 and 1.67, respectively. The occurrence of ADR detected at NBC consisting of VVR, VVR with injury, problem with blood flow, hematoma, nerve injury, arterial puncture and allergy were 1.02, 0.0016, 0.22, 0.43, 0.0004, 0 and 0.0006, respectively, but the occurrence of ADR at mobile units were 3.74, 0.0035, 0.17, 0.70, 0.0041, 0.0010 and 0.0058. In conclusion, the study revealed that ADR including severe VVR and VVR with injury were more frequently occurred at mobile units than at NBC. This is probably due to the environment, premise and equipment at NBC head quarter are better and more suitable than mobile site. In addition, the donors at NBC mostly are repeat donor who are full of willingness and well prepared for blood donation, while most of donors at mobile units were unintended and not well prepared. This crucial information will be very useful for NBC to further strengthen donor care service in order to improve donor care and promote donor retention.
Downloads
References
2. Pathak C, Pujani M, Pahuja S, Jain M. Adverse reactions in whole blood donors: an Indian scenario. Blood Transfus 2011;9:46-9.
3. Wee JH, Joung ES, Seo HS. The effect of the blood-donating environment on vasovagal reaction. Korean J Blood Transfus 2007;18:39-48.
4. Soisaang Phikulsod, Ubolwan Charoonruangrit, Pimol Chiewsilp et al, eds. Standard for Blood Banks and Transfusion Services, 3rd edition. Pimdee Kanpim Printing House, Bangkok, 2010.
5. Zervou EK, Ziciadis K, Karabini F, Xanthi E, Chrissostomou E, Tzolou A. Vasovagal reactions in blood donors during or immediately after blood donation. Transfus Med 2005;15:389-94.
6. Mahbub-ul-Alam M, Shamim Hyder M, Karim Khan M, Answarul Islam M. Adverse donor reaction during and immediately after venesection. TJA 2007;20:39–47.
7. Newman BH, Pichette S, Pichette D, Dzaka E, Adverse effects in blood donors after whole blood donation: A study of 1,000 blood donors interviewed 3 weeks after whole – blood donation. Transfusion 2003;43:598-603.
