Evaluation of the blood donation process from the donor's perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47456/rbps.v27i1.40897Keywords:
Quality Management, Blood Donors, Health administrationAbstract
Introduction: Blood donation is essential for maintaining blood transfusion services. Optimizing the donation process can improve donors' experiences throughout the act of donating blood. The Disney® Integration Matrix is a useful tool for monitoring service standards and evaluating quality of care. Objective: To analyze the service process of three blood centers through blood donors' written feedback using the four elements of the Disney® service standard. Methods: Donor feedback categorized as Satisfaction, Suggestion, and Complaint between 2012 and 2019 was adapted to the Disney® Integration Matrix. Each report was classified according to process safety, efficiency, courtesy, and show. Results: A total of 38,376 written reports were obtained from three blood centers. Of these, 10,271 (26.8%) were related to the service process, including 53.6% satisfaction reports, 29.2% suggestions, and 17.2% complaints. Complaints regarding process efficiency were the most frequent, whereas courtesy received the highest number of positive comments across all three centers. Process efficiency was inversely associated with safety and courtesy indicators. Among the four dimensions, the show category presented the lowest percentages in all blood centers. Considerable variation in satisfaction related to process efficiency was observed in 2015. Conclusion: The methodology proved useful for identifying strengths and weaknesses in the service process and for supporting the assessment of individual donor needs.
Downloads
References
World Health Organization. Towards 100% Voluntary Blood Donation: A Global Framework for Action. Geneva: WHO; 2010.
Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). 8º Boletim Anual de Produção Hemoterápica. Brasília: ANVISA; 2021.
Borges VL, Martinez EZ, Bendini MH, Costa MAGF, Ferreira SCL. Avaliação da fidedignidade de um instrumento voltado à satisfação do doador de sangue. Rev Bras Epidemiol. 2005;8(2):177-86.
Cohen RI. Lean methodology in health care. Chest. 2018;154(6):1448-1454.
Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria de Consolidação nº 5, de 28 de setembro de 2017. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2017.
Kim DU. The quest for quality blood banking program in the new millennium the American way. Int J Hematol. 2002;76(2):258-262.
Chaves ES, Araújo JS, Silva LC, Souza ND, Andrade PS. Redução do tempo de atendimento ao doador no processo de doação de sangue da Fundação Hemoam [Especialização]. Porto Alegre: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; 2018.
Meira SRC, Oliveira ASB, Santos CO. A contribuição da auditoria para a qualidade da gestão dos serviços de saúde. Braz J Bus. 2021;3(1):1021-1033.
Maraglino V, Dell’Olio L, Borri D, Portilla AI. Methodology for a study of the perceived quality of public transport in Santander. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2014;160:499-508.
Ekinci Y, Uray N, Ülengin F, Duran C. A segmentation based analysis for measuring customer satisfaction in maritime transportation. Transport. 2018;33(1):104-118.
Instituto Disney. O jeito Disney de encantar os clientes. São Paulo: Instituto Disney; 2011.
Silva TR, Junior GZ, Ferreira MRMN, Rosseto HC. Fidelização de doadores de sangue: avaliação da satisfação e percepção dos usuários com o serviço em um hemocentro regional. Rev Multidiscip Saúde. 2021;2(3):54.
Ricardo MRS, Brito A, Faro A. Satisfaction of users with hospital care in Aracaju/SE. Clín Cult. 2016;17(1):44-52.
Schnorr MR, Rodrigues HV, Spolaor A, Coelho CTS, Levay A. Gestão da qualidade de um hemocentro: a ferramenta da pesquisa de satisfação do usuário. In: 6º Congresso Internacional em Saúde; 2019; Rio Grande do Sul. [s.l.]: [s.n.]; 2019. p. 1-2.
Rinaldi JGS, Morabito R, Tachibana VM. A importância da rapidez de atendimento em supermercados: um estudo de caso. Gest Prod. 2009;16(1):1-14.
Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Manual de orientações para promoção da doação voluntária de sangue. Brasília: Editora MS; 2015.
Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Atenção à Saúde. Departamento de Atenção Especializada e Temática. Coordenação Geral de Sangue e Hemoderivados. Nota Técnica nº 35/2019-CGSH/DAET/SAES/MS. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2019.
Instituto Brasileiro de Opinião Pública e Estatística (IBOPE). Pesquisa de opinião pública sobre vegetarianismo. São Paulo: IBOPE; 2018.
Teixeira P, Valle S. Biossegurança: uma abordagem multidisciplinar. 2ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Fiocruz; 2010.
Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). Resolução da Diretoria Colegiada — RDC nº 34, de 11 de junho de 2014. Dispõe sobre as Boas Práticas no Ciclo do Sangue. Brasília: ANVISA; 2014.
Brasil. Supremo Tribunal Federal. Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade nº 5543/DF. Relator: Min. Edson Fachin. Julgamento: 11 maio 2020. Publicação: 26 ago 2020.
Crescitelli E, Guimarães CT, Milani GNF. Marketing de relacionamento aplicado ao varejo: uma proposta de programa de fidelização. Rev Adm UNIMEP. 2006;4(1):17-37.
Santos JP, Santos HO, Bezerra VHB, Moreira VF, Azevedo IA. Análise das estratégias de marketing de relacionamento: um estudo de caso em um mercadinho de bairro. Resende: Associação Educacional Dom Bosco; 2020.
Silva ASP, Silva STF, Valotta LA. Emprego do Net Promoter Score (NPS) para avaliação da rede de atenção à saúde: uma revisão de escopo. Destarte. 2025;14(1):43-62.
Pereira IS, Martins MNRP, Almeida TMG, Araujo LM, Pereira MS, Soares JGC, et al. Matriz SWOT e sua aplicabilidade na Estratégia Saúde da Família de Malvinas — Belém/PA. Cad Pedagógico. 2025;22(10):1-10.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Brazilian Journal of Health Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Saúde (RBPS) adopts the CC BY 4.0 license, which means that authors retain the copyright of the works they submit to the journal. Authors are responsible for declaring that their contribution is an original manuscript, that it has not been previously published, and that it is not under simultaneous review by another scientific journal. Upon submitting the manuscript, authors grant RBPS the exclusive right of first publication, subject to peer review.
Authors are permitted to enter into additional contracts for the non-exclusive distribution of the version published by RBPS (for example, in institutional repositories or as a book chapter), provided that due acknowledgment of authorship and of initial publication by RBPS is given. Authors are also encouraged to make their work available online (for example, in institutional repositories or on their personal pages) after its initial publication in the journal, with due acknowledgment of authorship and of the original publication by RBPS.
Accordingly, under the CC BY 4.0 license, readers have the right to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially;
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
