Rate of False Deferral and False Pass of Prospective Blood Donors Screened by Copper Sulphate Gravimetric Method at Hossana Blood Bank, Hossana, South Ethiopia
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2016-07
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Addis Ababa University
Abstract
Background: The primary responsibility of a blood transfusion service (BTS) is to provide asafe, sufficient and timely supply of blood and blood products so as to ensure that blood donationcauses no harm to the donor. The Copper Sulphate (CuSO4) screening test has been found toerroneously include anemic people and exclude eligible people and its performance is not wellstudied in poor settings like Ethiopia.
Objectives: To determine the rate of false deferral and false pass of prospective blood donorsscreened by the copper sulphate gravimetric test from April to June 2016 at Hossana bloodbank, Ethiopia..
Methods: A cross- sectional study was carried out from April to June 2016 in Hossana bloodbank. Blood sample from 422 voluntary donors were collected and analyzed by CuSo4gravimetric test and automated hematology analyzer (Cell-dyn 1800). The data was entered inEpi-Data 3.1 and analyzed by SPSS 20 and interpreted accordingly. P value less than 0.05 wasconsidered as statistically significant. Agreement between the two methods was determinedusing the Kappa coefficient.
Result: The overall deferra1 rate was 20.1% by the reference method and varies by bloodcollection site for the copper sulphate method (15.4% and 16.8% using capillary and wholeblood, respectively). False pass rates were 9.2% and 7.6% and false fail rates were 4.5% and4.3% using capillary and venous blood samples, respectively. The CuSo4 method using capillaryblood sample had sensitivity of 94.4%, specificity 54.1%, PPV 89.1% and NPV 70.8%, whileusing venous blood sample it gave sensitivity of 94.7%, specificity 62.4%, PPV 90.9% and NPV74.6%. The CuSo4 method had moderate with Kappa value of 0.53, (95% CI, 0.425-0.625,P<0.01) and substantial (Kappa value of 0.61, 95% CI (0.507 to 0.698), (P<0.01.) level ofagreement with the reference method using capillary and venous blood samples, respectively.
Conclusion: The high rate of false pass warrants the search for an alternative simple method toreplace the old copper sulphate method. Until replaced, CuSO4 method which moderatelyagrees with the reference method can be retained as a primary screening tool by applying strictquality control method.
Description
Keywords
False Deferral, False Pass