Lee S J, Liljas B, Churchill W H, Popovsky M A, Stowell C P, Cannon M E, Johannesson M
Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Transfusion. 1998 Aug;38(8):757-63. doi: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1998.38898375515.x.
The public's perception of autologous blood donation and transfusion as a worthwhile alternative to allogeneic blood transfusion increased dramatically with discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus. However, new concerns are being raised about the health outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the procedure. As more restrictive guidelines for autologous blood donation evolve, opposition from patients concerned about exposure to allogeneic blood may arise. Physicians' ability to reassure patients and garner their support for more restrictive policies requires an understanding of patients' concerns. The motivations, perceptions, and preferences of patients currently participating in autologous blood donation programs were investigated in this study.
Results from two questionnaire studies of 647 autologous blood donors are presented. The questionnaires assessed demographics, risk perceptions, preferences, willingness to pay, and reactions to different interventions designed to decrease patient preference for autologous blood donation.
Patients expressed a strong preference for the availability of autologous blood and indicated that they would be willing to pay substantial amounts of money even if the procedure were not covered by insurance. Despite education about the low risks of complications from allogeneic transfusions, an aversion to allogeneic transfusion and a willingness to pay for autologous blood donation persisted. Patients were not reassured by information on better infectious disease testing or physician recommendation against autologous blood donation.
Patients currently participating in autologous blood donor programs strongly prefer continued access to this procedure, primarily because they remain concerned about the complications of allogeneic transfusions. They may not be significantly reassured despite increasingly rigorous and costly improvements in donor and component screening.
随着人类免疫缺陷病毒的发现，公众将自体献血和输血视为异体输血的一种有价值替代方式的认知大幅提高。然而，人们对该程序的健康结果和成本效益提出了新的担忧。随着自体献血的指导方针变得更加严格，担心接触异体血的患者可能会产生反对意见。医生要想让患者安心并获得他们对更严格政策的支持，就需要了解患者的担忧。本研究调查了当前参与自体献血项目的患者的动机、认知和偏好。
呈现了对647名自体献血者进行的两项问卷调查的结果。问卷评估了人口统计学特征、风险认知、偏好、支付意愿以及对旨在降低患者对自体献血偏好的不同干预措施的反应。
患者强烈倾向于可获得自体血，并表示即使该程序不在保险范围内，他们也愿意支付大量金钱。尽管接受了关于异体输血并发症风险较低的教育，但对异体输血的厌恶以及为自体献血付费的意愿依然存在。关于更好的传染病检测信息或医生反对自体献血的建议并未让患者安心。
目前参与自体献血项目的患者强烈倾向于继续采用该程序，主要是因为他们仍然担心异体输血的并发症。尽管在献血者和血液成分筛查方面有越来越严格且成本高昂的改进措施，他们可能并不会因此而显著安心。
