The vasovagal reaction experience among blood donors: A qualitative study of factors that affect donor return. (August 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Thijsen, Amanda; Thorpe, Rachel; Davison, Tanya E.; Nguyen, Lilly; Masser, Barbara
• Is Part Of: Social science & medicine. Volume 282(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-08
• Subjects: Blood donation -- Vasovagal reaction -- Qualitative research -- Donor adverse events -- Retention -- Coping -- Appraisal; Social medicine -- Periodicals; Medical anthropology -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; Psychology -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine sociale -- Périodiques; Anthropologie médicale -- Périodiques; Santé publique -- Périodiques; Psychologie -- Périodiques; Médecine -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 362.105
• DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114142
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0277-9536

Abstract

Abstract: Rationale: Blood collection agencies face ongoing challenges in retaining voluntary donors to meet the demand for blood and blood-related products by healthcare services. A known deterrent to continued blood donation is the experience of a vasovagal reaction (VVR). However, there has been little research into donors' experiences of these reactions and the factors that influence their decision to return, which is essential information to inform strategies to improve donor return. Objective: The aim of this paper was to explore blood donor views and experiences of a VVR, with a particular interest in how the reaction influenced their return behaviour, using the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping. Methods: We conducted 34 semi-structured in-depth interviews between February and April 2018 with a sample of Australian donors who had experienced a VVR in the last seven days. Transcripts were analysed using the Framework Method. Results: The VVR elicited various emotional responses, which appeared to be influenced by social support, being aware of the possibility of experiencing a VVR, or the donation outcome. In turn, the VVR experience affected intentions to return, with those who reported more positive experiences expressing stronger intentions. Further, donors felt more likely to return if they perceived their risk of a recurrent event as low and if they were able to identify appropriate problem and emotion-focused coping strategies. Conclusion: This article provides novel insights into possible ways to encourage blood donor return following a VVR. Highlights: Vasovagal reactions were associated with varying degrees of emotional responses. Blood donor emotions affected by primary and secondary appraisal processes. Appraisal process resulted in problem- or emotion-focuses coping efforts. Clearly identified coping efforts increased donor intentions to return. The donors' social environment influenced all aspects of coping process.