Vox sanguinis · 2022
Research partnerships between blood services and public health authorities: An international, cross-sectional survey.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lewin Antoine, Osiowy Carla, Erikstrup Christian, Custer Brian, Renaud Christian, Tiberghien Pierre, Russell Alton, Lieshout-Krikke Ryanne, O'Brien Sheila F, Surveillance, Risk Assessment, Policy Sub-group of the ISBT Transfusion Transmitted Infectious Diseases Working Party
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought to the fore how blood services can partner with public health (PH) authorities to inform decisions. Yet the scope of partnerships between blood services and PH authorities is inadequately documented. We explored how blood services partner with PH authorities outside the scope of COVID-19.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: On 19 January 2022, survey was sent to employees of blood services located throughout the world. Survey questions mainly pertained to partnerships with PH authorities, including how blood specimens are used and collected.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven recipients-4 (14.8%) in Africa, 3 (11.1%) in Asia, 9 (33.3%) in Europe, 6 (22.2%) in North America, 2 (7.4%) in Oceania and 3 (11.1%) in South America-completed the survey. Fifteen recipients (55.6%) indicated their blood service was directly or indirectly supervised by PH authorities. Twenty-four recipients (88.9%) indicated currently using or planning to use blood donor data or samples for PH research or pathogen surveillance. A substantial proportion of respondents reported using samples or results from non-routine tests for the surveillance of non-transfusion-transmitted infectious disease pathogens (n = 13 [48.1%]); samples or results of non-routine tests for PH research unrelated to pathogens (n = 10 [37.0%]); donor data for PH research unrelated to pathogens (n = 12 [44.4%]) and donor data for PH research unrelated to transfusion safety (n = 11 [40.7%]). Fourteen (51.9%) had established (or planned to establish) longitudinal cohorts and 19 (70.4%) biobanks.
CONCLUSION: The majority of responding blood services were already involved in or planned to be involved in PH research or pathogen surveillance.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: On 19 January 2022, survey was sent to employees of blood services located throughout the world. Survey questions mainly pertained to partnerships with PH authorities, including how blood specimens are used and collected.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven recipients-4 (14.8%) in Africa, 3 (11.1%) in Asia, 9 (33.3%) in Europe, 6 (22.2%) in North America, 2 (7.4%) in Oceania and 3 (11.1%) in South America-completed the survey. Fifteen recipients (55.6%) indicated their blood service was directly or indirectly supervised by PH authorities. Twenty-four recipients (88.9%) indicated currently using or planning to use blood donor data or samples for PH research or pathogen surveillance. A substantial proportion of respondents reported using samples or results from non-routine tests for the surveillance of non-transfusion-transmitted infectious disease pathogens (n = 13 [48.1%]); samples or results of non-routine tests for PH research unrelated to pathogens (n = 10 [37.0%]); donor data for PH research unrelated to pathogens (n = 12 [44.4%]) and donor data for PH research unrelated to transfusion safety (n = 11 [40.7%]). Fourteen (51.9%) had established (or planned to establish) longitudinal cohorts and 19 (70.4%) biobanks.
CONCLUSION: The majority of responding blood services were already involved in or planned to be involved in PH research or pathogen surveillance.