10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Access to safe blood in low-income and middle-income countries: lessons from India

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Timely, affordable access to screened blood is essential to the provision of safe surgical care and depends on three key aspects: adequate volume of blood supply, safe protocols for blood donation and transfusion, and appropriate regulation to ensure safe, equitable and sustainable distribution. Many low-income and middle-income countries experience a deficit in these categories, particularly in rural areas. We draw on the experience of rural surgical practitioners in India and summarise the existing literature to evaluate India’s blood banking system and discuss its major barriers to the safe and equitable provision of blood. Many low-income and middle-income countries struggle with accruing a sufficient voluntary, unpaid blood donation base to meet the need. Efforts to increase blood supply through mandatory family replacement donations can lead to dangerous delays in care provision. Additionally, prohibition of unbanked, directed blood transfusion restricts the options of health practitioners, particularly in rural areas. Blood safety is also a significant concern, and efforts must be taken to decrease the risk of transfusion-transmitted infections and inform and treat donors who test positive. Lastly, blood banking systems need a centralised governing body to ensure fair prices for blood, promote comprehensive transfusion reporting and increase system-wide transparency and accountability.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Global Surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Transfusion of fresher vs older red blood cells in hospitalized patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

            The impact of transfusing fresher vs older red blood cells (RBCs) on patient-important outcomes remains controversial. Two recently published large trials have provided new evidence. We summarized results of randomized trials evaluating the impact of the age of transfused RBCs. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials enrolling patients who were transfused fresher vs older RBCs and reported outcomes of death, adverse events, and infection. Independently and in duplicate, reviewers determined eligibility, risk of bias, and abstracted data. We conducted random effects meta-analyses and rated certainty (quality or confidence) of evidence using the GRADE approach. Of 12 trials that enrolled 5229 participants, 6 compared fresher RBCs with older RBCs and 6 compared fresher RBCs with current standard practice. There was little or no impact of fresher vs older RBCs on mortality (relative risk [RR], 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.14; P = .45; I(2) = 0%, moderate certainty evidence) or on adverse events (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.91-1.14; P = .74; I(2) = 0%, low certainty evidence). Fresher RBCs appeared to increase the risk of nosocomial infection (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.00-1.18; P = .04; I(2) = 0%, risk difference 4.3%, low certainty evidence). Current evidence provides moderate certainty that use of fresher RBCs does not influence mortality, and low certainty that it does not influence adverse events but could possibly increase infection rates. The existing evidence provides no support for changing practices toward fresher RBC transfusion.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Moving on from voluntary non-remunerated donors: who is the best blood donor?

              Blood transfusion safety in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is marred by the high prevalence of infectious agents, chronic blood shortage and lack of resources. However, considerable pressure is applied by richer countries and international transfusion bodies to establish voluntary, non-remunerated blood donors (VNRD) as the only source of blood, excluding the traditional family/replacement donors on the grounds of a higher level of safety. Such a policy increases the cost of a unit of blood by two to fivefold and exacerbates the pre-existing blood shortage. This review provides compelling evidence that first-time VNRD are no safer than family/replacement donors and that only repeat donation provides improved blood safety. In order to limit blood shortage and maintain affordability of the blood supply in SSA, both types of donors should be accepted and both should be encouraged to donate regularly.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Glob Health
                BMJ Glob Health
                bmjgh
                bmjgh
                BMJ Global Health
                BMJ Global Health (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2059-7908
                2017
                18 May 2017
                : 2
                : 2
                : e000167
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Medical Education , Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai , New York, USA
                [2 ]departmentProgram in Global Surgery and Social Change , Harvard Medical School , Boston, USA
                [3 ]departmentDepartment of Plastic and Oral Surgery , Boston Children's Hospital , Boston, USA
                [4 ]departmentDepartment of Surgery , Weill Cornell Medicine , New York, USA
                [5 ]departmentDepartment of Medical Education , University of Miami Miller School of Medicine , Miami, FL, USA
                [6 ]departmentDepartment of Surgery , Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center , Boston, MA, USA
                [7 ]departmentDepartment of Surgery , Jan Swasthya Sahyog , Beltookri, Chhattisgarh, India
                [8 ]Association of Rural Surgeons of India , Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
                [9 ]departmentDepartment of Surgery , BARC Hospital , Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Hillary E Jenny; hillary.jenny@ 123456icahn.mssm.edu
                Article
                bmjgh-2016-000167
                10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000167
                5584485
                30206488
                e46da274-a8ac-4486-8fe8-569497a4a52b
                © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 24 August 2016
                : 13 February 2017
                : 16 February 2017
                Categories
                Analysis
                1506
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                blood banking,low- and middle-income countries,unbanked directed blood transfusion,global surgery,india,surgery,maternal health,traumatology,health policy,health systems

                Comments

                Comment on this article