Safety and protection of plasma donors: A scoping review and evidence gap map

Natalie Schroyens; Tine D'aes; Emmy De Buck; Susan Mikkelsen; Pierre Tiberghien; Katja van den Hurk; Christian Erikstrup; Veerle Compernolle; Hans Van Remoortel

doi:10.1111/vox.13544

Safety and protection of plasma donors: A scoping review and evidence gap map

Natalie Schroyens, Tine D'aes, Emmy De Buck, Susan Mikkelsen, Pierre Tiberghien, Katja van den Hurk, Christian Erikstrup, Veerle Compernolle, Hans Van Remoortel^*

^*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Institut for Klinisk Medicin - Immunologi

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avis › Review › Forskning › peer review

5 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Objectives: As part of a large-scale project to safely increase plasma collection in Europe, the current scoping review identifies the existing evidence (gaps) on adverse events (AEs) and other health effects in plasmapheresis donors, as well as factors that may be associated with such events/effects. Materials and Methods: We searched six databases and three registries. Study characteristics (publication type, language, study design, population, outcomes, associated factors, time of assessment, duration of follow-up, number and frequency of donations, convalescent plasma [y/n], setting and location) were synthesized narratively and in an interactive evidence gap map (EGM). Results: Ninety-four research articles and five registrations were identified. Around 90% were observational studies (57 controlled and 33 uncontrolled), and most of them were performed in Europe (55%) or the United States (20%). Factors studied in association with donor health included donor characteristics (e.g., sex, age) (n = 27), cumulative number of donations (n = 21), donation frequency (n = 11), plasma collection device or programme (n = 11), donor status (first time vs. repeat) (n = 10), donation volume per session (n = 8), time in donation programme (n = 3), preventive measures (n = 2) or other (n = 9). Conclusion: The current scoping review provides an accessible tool for researchers and policymakers to identify the available evidence (gaps) concerning plasmapheresis donation safety. Controlled prospective studies with long-term donor follow-up are scarce. Furthermore, additional experimental studies comparing the health effects of different donation frequencies are required to inform a safe upper limit for donation frequency.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Tidsskrift	Vox Sanguinis
Vol/bind	119
Nummer	2
Sider (fra-til)	110-120
Antal sider	11
ISSN	0042-9007
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1111/vox.13544
Status	Udgivet - feb. 2024

Adgang til dokumentet

10.1111/vox.13544

Andre filer og links

Link to publication in Scopus

Citationsformater

@article{c744d4ddeadd4b3d96f2da5008d34d19,

title = "Safety and protection of plasma donors: A scoping review and evidence gap map",

abstract = "Background and Objectives: As part of a large-scale project to safely increase plasma collection in Europe, the current scoping review identifies the existing evidence (gaps) on adverse events (AEs) and other health effects in plasmapheresis donors, as well as factors that may be associated with such events/effects. Materials and Methods: We searched six databases and three registries. Study characteristics (publication type, language, study design, population, outcomes, associated factors, time of assessment, duration of follow-up, number and frequency of donations, convalescent plasma [y/n], setting and location) were synthesized narratively and in an interactive evidence gap map (EGM). Results: Ninety-four research articles and five registrations were identified. Around 90% were observational studies (57 controlled and 33 uncontrolled), and most of them were performed in Europe (55%) or the United States (20%). Factors studied in association with donor health included donor characteristics (e.g., sex, age) (n = 27), cumulative number of donations (n = 21), donation frequency (n = 11), plasma collection device or programme (n = 11), donor status (first time vs. repeat) (n = 10), donation volume per session (n = 8), time in donation programme (n = 3), preventive measures (n = 2) or other (n = 9). Conclusion: The current scoping review provides an accessible tool for researchers and policymakers to identify the available evidence (gaps) concerning plasmapheresis donation safety. Controlled prospective studies with long-term donor follow-up are scarce. Furthermore, additional experimental studies comparing the health effects of different donation frequencies are required to inform a safe upper limit for donation frequency.",

keywords = "adverse events, health effects, plasma donor, plasmapheresis, safety",

author = "Natalie Schroyens and Tine D'aes and {De Buck}, Emmy and Susan Mikkelsen and Pierre Tiberghien and {van den Hurk}, Katja and Christian Erikstrup and Veerle Compernolle and {Van Remoortel}, Hans",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 International Society of Blood Transfusion.",

year = "2024",

month = feb,

doi = "10.1111/vox.13544",

language = "English",

volume = "119",

pages = "110--120",

journal = "Vox Sanguinis",

issn = "0042-9007",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Safety and protection of plasma donors

T2 - A scoping review and evidence gap map

AU - Schroyens, Natalie

AU - D'aes, Tine

AU - De Buck, Emmy

AU - Mikkelsen, Susan

AU - Tiberghien, Pierre

AU - van den Hurk, Katja

AU - Erikstrup, Christian

AU - Compernolle, Veerle

AU - Van Remoortel, Hans

PY - 2024/2

Y1 - 2024/2

N2 - Background and Objectives: As part of a large-scale project to safely increase plasma collection in Europe, the current scoping review identifies the existing evidence (gaps) on adverse events (AEs) and other health effects in plasmapheresis donors, as well as factors that may be associated with such events/effects. Materials and Methods: We searched six databases and three registries. Study characteristics (publication type, language, study design, population, outcomes, associated factors, time of assessment, duration of follow-up, number and frequency of donations, convalescent plasma [y/n], setting and location) were synthesized narratively and in an interactive evidence gap map (EGM). Results: Ninety-four research articles and five registrations were identified. Around 90% were observational studies (57 controlled and 33 uncontrolled), and most of them were performed in Europe (55%) or the United States (20%). Factors studied in association with donor health included donor characteristics (e.g., sex, age) (n = 27), cumulative number of donations (n = 21), donation frequency (n = 11), plasma collection device or programme (n = 11), donor status (first time vs. repeat) (n = 10), donation volume per session (n = 8), time in donation programme (n = 3), preventive measures (n = 2) or other (n = 9). Conclusion: The current scoping review provides an accessible tool for researchers and policymakers to identify the available evidence (gaps) concerning plasmapheresis donation safety. Controlled prospective studies with long-term donor follow-up are scarce. Furthermore, additional experimental studies comparing the health effects of different donation frequencies are required to inform a safe upper limit for donation frequency.

AB - Background and Objectives: As part of a large-scale project to safely increase plasma collection in Europe, the current scoping review identifies the existing evidence (gaps) on adverse events (AEs) and other health effects in plasmapheresis donors, as well as factors that may be associated with such events/effects. Materials and Methods: We searched six databases and three registries. Study characteristics (publication type, language, study design, population, outcomes, associated factors, time of assessment, duration of follow-up, number and frequency of donations, convalescent plasma [y/n], setting and location) were synthesized narratively and in an interactive evidence gap map (EGM). Results: Ninety-four research articles and five registrations were identified. Around 90% were observational studies (57 controlled and 33 uncontrolled), and most of them were performed in Europe (55%) or the United States (20%). Factors studied in association with donor health included donor characteristics (e.g., sex, age) (n = 27), cumulative number of donations (n = 21), donation frequency (n = 11), plasma collection device or programme (n = 11), donor status (first time vs. repeat) (n = 10), donation volume per session (n = 8), time in donation programme (n = 3), preventive measures (n = 2) or other (n = 9). Conclusion: The current scoping review provides an accessible tool for researchers and policymakers to identify the available evidence (gaps) concerning plasmapheresis donation safety. Controlled prospective studies with long-term donor follow-up are scarce. Furthermore, additional experimental studies comparing the health effects of different donation frequencies are required to inform a safe upper limit for donation frequency.

KW - adverse events

KW - health effects

KW - plasma donor

KW - plasmapheresis

KW - safety

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85173780802&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/vox.13544

DO - 10.1111/vox.13544

M3 - Review

C2 - 37814964

AN - SCOPUS:85173780802

SN - 0042-9007

VL - 119

SP - 110

EP - 120

JO - Vox Sanguinis

JF - Vox Sanguinis

IS - 2

ER -

Safety and protection of plasma donors: A scoping review and evidence gap map

Abstract

Adgang til dokumentet

Andre filer og links

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater