Narratives of the convalescent plasma donor in a Peruvian social security hospital.: motivations, fears, expectations and experiences

  1. Silvana M. Matassini Eyzaguirre
  2. Christian Villanueva Yapa
  3. Ausberto Chunga Chunga
  4. Arturo Sagastegui Soto
  5. Ibeth Melania Neyra Vera
  6. Suly Soto Ordoñez
  7. Martina Guillermo Román
  8. Martin Oyanguren Miranda
  9. Percy Soto-Becerra
  10. Leda Yamileé Hurtado Roca
  11. Jorge L. Maguiña
  12. Araujo-Castillo Roger Vladimir

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives

To know and explore from convalescent plasma donator’s voices the experience in the blood donation process at a Peruvian social security hospital.

Methods

Qualitative study with a phenomenological design. The investigation was carried out in 01 hospitals of the social security of Peru. Semi-structured interviews were carried out.

Results

Eleven donors of convalescent plasma were interviewed. The main motivations for donating were being able to contribute to national research and supporting patients affected by COVID-19. Fears focus on the possible risk of contagion within the hospital. Donors emphasised the attention and support of health personnel alongside the donation procedure. The main expectations and suggestions point towards greater dissemination of donation campaigns with special emphasis on safety. Likewise, an improvement in the time of the donation procedure (from enrolment to the extraction of convalescent plasma), and the implementation of friendly spaces to encourage future blood donation campaigns were highlighted.

Conclusions

The experience of the convalescent plasma donors was positive. However, improvements must be made in terms of processes and infrastructure to ensure future successful blood donation campaigns.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.02.16.22270690: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: Each interview lasted approximately 45 minutes and was recorded with the verbal consent of the participants.
    IRB: The thematic axes are summarised in the next table: The study was approved by the specific research ethics committee for COVID-19 of the Institute for Health Technology Assessment and Research of EsSalud (IETSI - EsSalud), on December 19, 2020.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Limitations: The study was conducted with donors who were able to complete the donation process. Therefore, we did not collect testimonies of those who initiated the enrolment and who, for various reasons, either directly related to the requirements of the study or personal nature, did not complete the procedure. Likewise, health personnel involved in convalescent plasma donation were not interviewed.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2022.02.16.22270690v1 on medRxiv