"Why don't you want my poop?" Willing stool donor's experiences of being ineligible to donate intestinal microbiota

被引:0
|
作者
Hyde, Melissa K. [1 ,5 ]
Masser, Barbara M. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Spears, Lianne [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Queensland, Sch Psychol, St Lucia, Qld, Australia
[2] Australian Red Cross Lifeblood, Strategy & Growth, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[3] Univ Cambridge, Natl Inst Hlth & Care, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Res Blood & Transplant Res Unit Donor Hlth & Behav, Cambridge, England
[4] Australian Red Cross Lifeblood, Donor Engagement & Experience, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[5] Univ Queensland, Sch Psychol, McElwain Bldg, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
关键词
deferral; eligibility; fecal donation; fecal microbiota transplantation; intestinal microbiota donation; stool donor; BLOOD;
D O I
10.1111/trf.17516
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Blood collection agencies (BCAs) hosting stool (fecal or poo) donor programs report high rates of donor deferral. However, the impact of deferral on willing donors, in terms of personal well-being and future engagement with BCAs, remains unexplored. Accordingly, we surveyed those attempting to donate intestinal microbiota about their experience of being ineligible.Study Design and Methods: A total of 196 potential stool donors from Australia's BCA (>90% blood/blood product donors) completed the first stage of eligibility screening and then an online survey once notified of their ineligibility. Respondents reported motives for donating, perceptions of screening and improvements needed, experience of being told they are ineligible, and their feelings about this.Results: Over 80% of participants were ineligible to donate. Of those ineligible, 58% did not know why they were ineligible resulting in potentially future eligible donors being permanently lost. Motives (>5%) included helping others, being a human substance donor, understanding benefits, curiosity/novelty, and helping science/research. Participants identified they needed clear and timely information during screening and a specific reason for their ineligibility. Participants commonly experienced disappointment, confusion, and calm in response to being ineligible.Discussion: BCAs need strategies to mitigate the disappointment of ineligible donors, maintain satisfaction with BCAs, and preserve donor identity since many ineligible donors give multiple human substances. BCAs should provide more information about eligibility criteria during early screening stages to reduce disappointment and give personalized information about ineligibility to resolve the confusion. Offering alternative opportunities to give may reduce disappointment and increase ineligible donor engagement.
引用
收藏
页码:1916 / 1925
页数:10
相关论文
共 2 条
  • [1] I don't want to leave my child: How mothers and fathers affect mother's breastfeeding duration and leave length
    Van Egdom, Drake
    Piszczek, Matthew M.
    Wen, Xueqi
    Zhang, Jing
    Granillo-Velasquez, Kenneth E.
    Spitzmueller, Christiane
    JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2024, 97 (01) : 301 - 320
  • [2] "You don't want to know just about my lungs, you…want to know more about me". Patients and their caregivers' evaluation of a nurse-led COPD supportive care service
    Ora, Linda
    Wilkes, Lesley
    Mannix, Judy
    Gregory, Linda
    Luck, Lauretta
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2024, 33 (05) : 1896 - 1905