4.0 Article

Iranian blood donors' motivations and their influencing factors

期刊

TRANSFUSION MEDICINE
卷 21, 期 4, 页码 247-252

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3148.2011.01077.x

关键词

blood donor volunteer; motivation

资金

  1. Blood Transfusion Research Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: One of the challenges faced by blood transfusion services is the motivation of blood donors. The purpose of this study was to define the motivations of Iranian donors. Methodology: A total of 16 955 volunteers were studied to evaluate their motivation for blood donation in 2003 and 2004. A questionnaire was designed covering socio-demographic characteristics, history of blood donation and a list of reasons for donating. The donor physician determined the donor's motivation after an interview. Motivation was classified as internal (altruistic and religious beliefs) and external motives. Results: The main motivations were 6629 (39 . 1%) altruistic, 6552 (38 . 6%) good for one's health and 1931 (11 . 4%) religious beliefs. It was shown that 8560 volunteers (50 . 5%) had internal motivations and 8395 (49 . 5%) had external motivations. Internal motivations were significantly higher in women, regular and educated donors. Conclusion: This study showed that internal motives are the main reason for blood donation in Iranian donors, especially in female, regular and high-educated donors. Thus, altruistic and religious messages can be emphasized in recruiting and retaining donors, particularly in this group. Nearly half of the donors were motivated by external factors - mainly to improve their own health status, especially in older donors. This may be due to a psychological impact in which they feel improvement in their general health. As voluntary non-remunerated blood donation is defined without considering the motivational factor, one might consider a new term such as 'internal motivated voluntary blood donors' in accordance with their motivation and efforts could be centered about recruiting these specific donors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据