Brooks Jay P
Department of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100275, Gainesville, FL 32610-0275, USA.
J Blood Transfus. 2012;2012:407326. doi: 10.1155/2012/407326. Epub 2011 Dec 7.
Pursuit of pharmaceutical purity of the blood in the bag has led to a shrinking donor base and a significantly more expensive product. Decisions regarding new infectious marker testing and donor deferrals have typically been made emphasizing decreasing one specific risk without considering the effect the intervention will have on the overall safety and availability of blood transfusion. Regulations have been formulated by governmental agencies with limited input from the medical community. The decision making process has lacked risk benefit analyses and has not had the robustness associated with spirited discussions. Policies made in this manner may result in certain risks being decreased but can also have adverse unintended consequences. Being guided by the ethical principles of nonmaleficence, beneficence, autonomy, and justice, we need to evaluate our actions in the context of overall blood safety rather than narrowly focusing on any one area.
追求袋中血液的药物纯度导致献血者群体缩小以及产品成本大幅增加。关于新的感染标志物检测和献血者延期的决策通常是在强调降低一种特定风险的情况下做出的,而没有考虑该干预措施对输血总体安全性和可及性的影响。政府机构在制定法规时,来自医学界的意见有限。决策过程缺乏风险效益分析,也没有那种充满活力的讨论所具有的稳健性。以这种方式制定的政策可能会降低某些风险,但也可能产生意想不到的不良后果。我们应以不伤害、行善、自主和公正等伦理原则为指导,在整体血液安全的背景下评估我们的行动,而不是狭隘地关注任何一个领域。