...
首页> 外文期刊>Vox Sanguinis: International Journal of Blood Transfusion and Immunohaematology >Donor's understanding of the definition of sex as applied to predonation screening questions.
【24h】

Donor's understanding of the definition of sex as applied to predonation screening questions.

机译:捐赠者的理解性的定义应用于predonation筛选问题。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Predonation screening questions about sexual risk factors should provide an extra layer of safety from recently acquired infections that may be too early to be detected by testing. Donors are required to read a definition of sex as it applies to predonation screening questions each time they come to donate, but how well donors apply such definitions has not been evaluated. We aimed to determine how donors define sex when answering screening questions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 1297 whole blood donors were asked in a private interview to select from a list of sexual activities which ones they believed were being asked about in sexual background questions. Donors' definitions were coded as under-inclusive, correct or over-inclusive in relation to the blood services' definition. Qualitative interviews were carried out with 21 donors to understand reasoning behind definitions. RESULTS: Most donors had an over-inclusive definition (58.7%) or the correct definition (31.9%). Of the 9.4% of donors who had an under-inclusive definition, 95% included both vaginal and anal sex, but not oral sex. About 9% in each group were first-time donors (P > 0.05) who had never read the definition. The qualitative interviews indicated that donors reason their definition based on their own concept of transmissible disease risk. CONCLUSION: Donors apply a range of definitions of sex when answering questions about their sexual background. This may be due to different concepts of risk activities, and required reading of the definition has little impact.
机译:背景和目的:Predonation筛选性风险因素应该质疑从最近提供一个额外的安全层获得性感染可能为时过早被测试。性的定义,因为它适用于predonation每次他们来筛选问题捐赠,但捐助者如何应用等定义没有被评估。确定捐助者定义性在回答筛选问题。总,1297年整个献血者被要求在一个私人采访从列表中选择的性哪一个他们认为是活动被问及在背景性问题。被编码为捐赠者的定义包含的,正确的或空投与血液服务的定义。定性访谈进行了21个捐赠者了解背后的原因定义。空投(58.7%)或正确的定义定义(31.9%)。一个包含的定义,既包括95%阴道和肛交,但不是口交。在每组首次捐助者(P > 0.05)他从来没有读过定义。定性访谈表明,捐助者原因他们根据他们自己的定义传染性疾病风险的概念。结论:捐助者应用范围的定义性在回答关于他们的问题性背景。风险活动的概念,并要求阅读定义的影响很小。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号