PubMed · 15209902
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
G Gogarty, C Wickenden. 2004. Planning for future demand.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6892.2004.00474.x
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: Improvement in donor return rates, especially among first-time donors, may significantly improve the blood supply. There are few rigorous studies of the effectiveness of various approaches to donor recruitment, however. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: By use of a single-blind, randomized trial design, 6919 post-September 11, 2001, first-time donors were randomly assigned into the following intervention arms: T-shirt incentive versus none, recruitment scripts with a patient story (Script A) versus a complimentary message including the donor's blood type (Script B), and telephone versus e-mail recruitment. Our primary outcome was a second donation within 6 months. Rate ratios (RRs) and 95 percent confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated with Taylor series methods. RESULTS: A total of 1421 (20.5%) first-time donors returned within the 6 months, including 1252 with a second and 169 with both second and third donations. The T-shirt incentive was not effective in increasing returns compared to no incentive (20.5% vs. 20.6%; RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91-1.09). Script A was significantly more effective than Script B (22.2% vs. 18.9%; RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07-1.29). E-mail was substantially less effective than telephone recruitment (13.2% vs. 27.8%; RR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57). CONCLUSIONS: A T-shirt incentive had no apparent effect, but an empathetic message significantly improved the return donation rate. E-mail recruitment was substantially less effective than telephone recruitment, perhaps due to technical problems. The study illustrates the utility of the randomized clinical trial study design for testing donor recruitment strategies.
BACKGROUND: Selection of a cord blood (CB) unit for allogeneic transplantation relies on graft characterization results provided by cord blood banks (CBBs). The goal was to compare the graft characterization results obtained upon thawing and washing to those provided by CBBs at selection. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: With tests that assess CB graft characteristics known to impact engraftment, CB units have been analyzed after thaw and before infusion. Our results were compared to data provided by CBBs to determine the impact on engraftment and assess how CBB-supplied information can affect future CB unit selection. RESULTS: Variability was noted as to the type of information provided by the different CBBs. Also, variability was found between the information provided by CBBs and the graft characterization results obtained upon thawing and washing. In some cases, CB measures known to be predictive of engraftment were found much lower than reported by CBBs. Only the total nucleated cell count, which is the main CB graft selection criterion besides HLA matching, correlated favorably. CONCLUSIONS: Our data reveal a high degree of variability in graft characteristics provided by CBBs and often poor correlation with results obtained on thawed and washed CB units. We suggest that standardized laboratory procedures aimed at graft characterization should be used by both CBBs and transplant centers to avoid unacceptable discrepancies.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.