A paper published in Transfusion Medicine examined the findings from a blood safety perceptions study in the wake of blood inquiry. Specifically, the authors explained that their aimed to assess the, “short-term impact of the announcement of the United Kingdom’s (UK) Infected Blood Inquiry (IBI) findings on the general public’s perceptions regarding overall blood safety and donation behavi[o]r (i.e., people’s willingness to donate blood and encourage others to donate).” The authors of the blood safety perceptions study hypothesized that, “compared to the U.S., people in the UK will show reductions in their perceptions of overall blood safety and increased perceptions of infection risk from transfusion. Furthermore,[they expected] that people may wish to psychologically and behavi[o]rally distance themselves from an action perceived as harmful to others. This may result in a generally reduced willingness to be a blood donor and willingness to encourage others to donate as well.”
The blood safety perceptions study included 1,635 from the general populations of the U.S. (N=747) and the UK (N=888) between a pre-IBI period (May 3rd-7th, 2024) and a post-IBI period (May 30th-June 30th, 2024). The participants took part in online surveys and received approximately $11 per/hour for each survey. Via survey questions, the researchers measured individuals’ view of the infection risk for a blood recipient on a scale of 1 (no risk at all) to 5 (an extremely large risk) and, “‘to what extent [they felt] it is safe in the UK/U.S. to have a blood transfusion if [needed]?’ (from 1=‘Not at all safe’ to 11=‘Completely safe’).” The study also examined participants’ willingness to donate and encourage others to do so as well on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 7 (completely).
The researchers of the blood safety perceptions study noted that, “[t]he pre-IBI sample comprises 2,060 observations (N=1,032 U.S., N=1,028 UK). Of these 2,060 observations, 175 (17.96 percent) in the U.S. and 107 (10.41 percent) in the UK stated they were prior blood recipients. For the reasons described above, these recipients were excluded from the post-IBI study. As a result, 1,778 participants (857 U.S. 921 UK), were invited to participate in the post-IBI study. Of these, 747 responded in the U.S. (87.16 percent response rate), and 888 (96.41 percent response rate) in the UK.” They found that, “[f]or perceived safety of transfusion, there was no significant difference pre- and post- in the U.S. (p=0.58), but a small but statistically significant decrease in the UK (p<0.01). The decline in the UK was 1.83 percent, which [was] a small change. [Additionally, they noted that in their findings,] a small but significant decline in perceived safety in the UK sample. [They] observe[d] no significant change in the level of perceived infection risk in UK participants.” The blood safety perceptions study researchers added that, “[t]here were no significant effects on infection risk. The results show that a significant decrease in perceived transfusion safety, relative to no change, is associated with a significant decrease in willingness to donate in the U.S. (OR=3.396, p<0.01), and for the total sample (OR=2.336, p<0.01), but not in the UK (OR=1.594, p=0.31). For encouraging others to donate, a significant decrease in perceived safety is associated with a significant decrease in encouraging others in the UK (OR=2.697, p<0.05), U.S. (OR=2.072, p<0.05), and across the total sample (OR=2.396, p<0.01). Positive changes in perceptions of safety show no differences in reduced approach and encouraging others.”
Other findings of the blood safety perceptions study included:
- “[o]lder participants: Millennials (OR=0.435, p<0.05) and Gen X + Boomers (OR=0.412, p< 0.05) relative to Gen Z in the U.S. have a lower likelihood of having an increased change in their perception of infection risk. For the UK, Millennials (OR=2.248, p<0.05) and Gen X + Boomers (OR=2.417, p<0.01) relative to Gen Z are associated with a significantly higher likelihood of having decreased changes in the perception of safety;
- [w]omen in the UK had a significantly higher increase in perception of infection risk (OR=1.642, p<0.01). These results are in line with previous literature showing that women are generally more risk-averse than men, are more likely to perceive the same events as riskier than men and are more likely to require blood transfusions;
- [e]ducation was generally not significantly associated with any of the outcome measures, except for reduced encourage in the U.S.; [and]
- [b]lood donors in the UK are associated with a lower likelihood of having a decrease in approach (OR=0.659, p<0.05) and encourage (OR= 0.665, p<0.01).”
The authors of the blood safety perceptions study concluded that, “[t]he general public in the UK perceives the current blood supply as extremely safe, and the IBI announcement had a minimal impact on this perception. Compared to the UK, blood safety perceptions are lower in the U.S. Moreover, significant reductions in safety perceptions are associated with a lower willingness to donate blood. However, in the UK, even those who perceive a reduction in safety do not show a significantly lower willingness to donate. Future research should explore long-term impacts, continue to monitor public perceptions as compensation schemes are rolled out, and examine opinions and perceptions of blood recipients.” Limitations acknowledged in the paper included, “[t]here may be some selection bias (i.e., attrition), but this is unlikely given that the follow-up response rates are all about 85 percent; while we examined perceptions of overall blood safety for transfusion, future work should consider differentiating between blood, blood products and plasma.”
Citation: Mills, R.M., Merz, E.-M., and Croucher, M. “The infected blood inquiry: Impact on public perceptions of blood supply risk, safety, and donation attitudes.” Transfusion Medicine. 2024.