Vox sanguinis · 2024
End of selection criteria based on sexual orientation: An international symposium on alternatives to donation deferral.
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, Goldman Mindy, Busch Michael P, Davison Katy, van de Laar Thijs, Tiberghien Pierre, Shinar Eilat, O'Brien Sheila F, Lambert Gilles, Field Stephen, Hervig Tor, Tan Darrell H S, Custer Brian, Drews Steven J, Lanteri Marion C, Klochkov Denis, Widmer Eleonora, Domingue Marie-Pier, Renaud Christian, Germain Marc
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Until recently, gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM) were deferred from donating blood for 3-12 months since the last male-to-male sexual contact. This MSM deferral has been discontinued by several high-income countries (HIC) that now perform gender-neutral donor selection.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An international symposium (held on 20-04-2023) gathered experts from seven HICs to (1) discuss how this paradigm shift might affect the mitigation strategies for transfusion-transmitted infections and (2) address the challenges related to gender-neutral donor selection.
RESULTS: Most countries employed a similar approach for implementing a gender-neutral donor selection policy: key stakeholders were consulted; the transition was bridged by time-limited deferrals; donor compliance was monitored; and questions or remarks on anal sex and the number and/or type of sexual partners were often added. Many countries have now adopted a gender-neutral approach in which questions on pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have been added (or retained, when already in place). Other countries used mitigation strategies, such as plasma quarantine or pathogen reduction technologies for plasma and/or platelets.
CONCLUSION: The experience with gender-neutral donor selection has been largely positive among the countries covered herein and seems to be acceptable to stakeholders, donors and staff. The post-implementation surveillance data collected so far appear reassuring with regards to safety, although longer observation periods are necessary. The putative risks associated with HIV antiretrovirals should be further investigated.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An international symposium (held on 20-04-2023) gathered experts from seven HICs to (1) discuss how this paradigm shift might affect the mitigation strategies for transfusion-transmitted infections and (2) address the challenges related to gender-neutral donor selection.
RESULTS: Most countries employed a similar approach for implementing a gender-neutral donor selection policy: key stakeholders were consulted; the transition was bridged by time-limited deferrals; donor compliance was monitored; and questions or remarks on anal sex and the number and/or type of sexual partners were often added. Many countries have now adopted a gender-neutral approach in which questions on pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have been added (or retained, when already in place). Other countries used mitigation strategies, such as plasma quarantine or pathogen reduction technologies for plasma and/or platelets.
CONCLUSION: The experience with gender-neutral donor selection has been largely positive among the countries covered herein and seems to be acceptable to stakeholders, donors and staff. The post-implementation surveillance data collected so far appear reassuring with regards to safety, although longer observation periods are necessary. The putative risks associated with HIV antiretrovirals should be further investigated.