Volume 51, Issue 8 pp. 1820-1828

Healthy donor effect: its magnitude in health research among blood donors

Femke Atsma

Corresponding Author

Femke Atsma

Femke Atsma, Department Donor Studies, Sanquin Research, P.O. Box 1013, 6501 BA Nijmegen, The Netherlands; e-mail: [email protected]. Search for more papers by this author
Ingrid Veldhuizen

Ingrid Veldhuizen

From the Department Donor Studies, Sanquin Research, and the Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and HTA, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Search for more papers by this author
André Verbeek

André Verbeek

From the Department Donor Studies, Sanquin Research, and the Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and HTA, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Search for more papers by this author
Wim de Kort

Wim de Kort

From the Department Donor Studies, Sanquin Research, and the Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and HTA, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Search for more papers by this author
Femmie de Vegt

Femmie de Vegt

From the Department Donor Studies, Sanquin Research, and the Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and HTA, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 22 February 2011
Citations: 113

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The healthy donor effect has been mentioned as a methodologic problem in blood donor health research. The aim of this study was to investigate different elements of the healthy donor effect.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: First, recent donors (<4 years registered as a donor) were compared with the general population. Second, active and lapsed donors were compared. Third, short-career donors (<14 donations) were compared with long-career donors (>37 donations). Various health and lifestyle indicators were used as outcome measures.

RESULTS: Compared to the general population, recent donors had a better self-rated health (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.61), visited the general practitioner (GP) less often (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.60-0.72), and were less often treated by a specialist (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.93). Recent donors also exhibited a healthier lifestyle compared to the general population. When examining active versus lapsed donors, similar results were found in favor of active donors. With respect to donation career, long-career donors were healthier than short-career donors, but effects were less strong; the ORs were 1.33 (95% CI, 1.15-1.54) for self-rated health, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.76-0.94) for GP visit, and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.68-1.00) for specialist treatment. When comparing long- and short-career donors on lifestyle indicators, there were barely any significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS: The findings strongly point to the presence of a healthy donor effect when comparing donors with the general population and active versus lapsed donors. The healthy donor effect was less pronounced within active donors, when comparing long- and short-career donors. Therefore, health research should primarily be carried out within active donors.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.