Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Vox Sang. 2019 Jul 5. doi: 10.1111/vox.12821. [Epub ahead of print]

When are infection risks of blood transfusion tolerable? Towards understanding the ethical views of stakeholders in the blood supply.

Author information

1
Department of Blood-borne Infections (BOI), Sanquin Blood Supply Foundation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
2
Department of Communication, Philosophy and Technology (CPT), Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:

The perception of transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs) is sensitive to various concerns besides the probability and impact of infection, and some of these concerns may be ethically relevant. This paper aims to advance thinking about blood safety policies by exploring and explaining stakeholders' reasons to consider TTI risks tolerable or intolerable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Inspired by critical empirical ethics and phenomenological hermeneutics, we held interviews and focus group discussions to explore the moral experience of policymakers, hematologists, blood donors and recipients. Respondents were invited to discuss general concerns about the blood supply, to address the tolerability of TTI risks compared with other hazards and to comment on the costs of blood safety. Arguments for tolerance or intolerance towards TTI risks were analysed qualitatively.

RESULTS:

Stakeholders' views could be clustered into seven categories: (1) clinical impact; (2) probability of infection; (3) avoidability of infection; (4) cost and health benefits; (5) other consequences of safety measures; (6) non-consequentialist ethical arguments; and (7) stakeholders' interests. Various arguments were offered that resonate with current ethical thinking about blood safety. Assuming that resources spent on inefficient blood safety measures could be applied more beneficially elsewhere, for example, responders typically expressed tolerance towards TTI risks. Some other arguments seem novel, for instance arguments for risk intolerance based on the low probability of infection and arguments for risk tolerance if patients have a poor prognosis.

CONCLUSION:

Understanding the moral experience of stakeholders enriches ethical debate about blood safety and prepares developing more widely acceptable policies.

KEYWORDS:

acceptability; blood donation; blood donor; blood recipient; risk; transfusion-transmitted infection

PMID:
31273806
DOI:
10.1111/vox.12821

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center