Audiovisual touch‐screen computer‐assisted self‐interviewing for donor health histories: results from two years experience with the system

BACKGROUND: The donor history interview is an important aspect of blood safety, in part designed to identify unsuitable donors who may present a risk to blood recipients. There is evidence from behavioral science literature that use of computer-assisted interviewing may be superior to face-to-face (FTF) and paper techniques in eliciting sensitive behavioral information of interest to blood collection facilities. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Audiovisual touchscreen computer-assisted donor self-interviewing with the AABB Uniform Donor History Questionnaire was deployed for routine use in a regional blood center replacing FTF interviews. Donor and staff perception and satisfaction surveys were performed to assess acceptance of the system. Time studies of automated and manual methods were conducted. Rates of deferral of first-time donors for high-risk behaviors and rates of errors and omissions on donor interviewing for the two systems were tabulated and compared. RESULTS: Donors and staff strongly preferred the automated system in all dimensions assessed. Donor time increased by 4 minutes but staff time declined by 5 minutes per interview. Identification of high-risk behaviors among first-time donors significantly increased. Rates of errors and omissions on donor history forms identified at audit were reduced. CONCLUSIONS: Both blood donors and collections staff enthusiastically accepted the automated donor interviewing system. A well-designed audiovisual touchscreen donor self-interviewing system is superior to face-to-face interviewing and most likely more effective than paper interviewing. n December 2001, we reported results of a pilot study of an audiovisual touch-screen computer-assisted donor self-interviewing (AVT-CASI) system for obtaining blood donor health histories at the Hoxworth Blood Center. 1 A donor survey, included as part of the study, showed that the system was an effective means of health history interviewing according to a substantial majority of responding donors. Donors found the system clear and understandable (92%), were comfortable with the process and the privacy provided (95%), and were satisfied with the time required (64%). Among repeat donors who had a preference either for AVT-CASI or for its FTF predecessor, 64 percent preferred AVT-CASI, 90 percent found it more understandable, and 80 percent indicated a greater likelihood of returning when interviewed by the automated system.