Icon Legend

This session is not in your schedule.

This session is in your schedule. Click again to remove it.

Event Icons

Assessor Sessions

Committee Meetings

Foundation Events

Networking Events

Oral Abstracts

CABP Eligible

Education/Developing Curriculum - Training Methods for Employees/Students/Residents and Fellows

(P-ED-10) Simulation-Based Education For Blood Donor Center Technicians

Sunday, October 26, 2025

12:00 PM - 1:00 PM PT

Presenting Author(s)

MF

Megan Fischer, M.H.A.

Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Transfusion Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
St. Charles, Minnesota, United States

Background/Case Studies: Blood donor center technicians are expected to recognize and treat donor adverse reactions to blood donations. The Mayo Clinic Blood Donor Center primarily uses lecture-based training on these skills. However, a didactic-only approach may not adequately prepare the learner to confidently recognize and treat a donor who is having an adverse reaction to blood donation. Simulation-based education is an experiential learning technique and is widely used throughout healthcare.

Study

Design/Methods:

In collaboration with the Mayo Clinic Multidisciplinary Simulation Center, a course was developed with the intent to provide a safe and controlled environment in which learners can practice and improve their skills in managing adverse donor reactions. Each scenario was designed for three learners. The blood donor role in each scenario was portrayed by a simulated patient recruited and hired by the Mayo Clinic Multidisciplinary Simulation Center. Two scenarios were written to reflect common adverse reactions to whole blood donation, specifically mild and moderate vasovagal reactions. Pre-brief and debrief sessions were held before and after each scenario.

An anonymous survey, using five-point Likert scale, open and closed questions, was conducted the day prior to the simulation course and immediately after to determine knowledge and beliefs surrounding their education on donor reaction management. Descriptive statistics and level of agreement or disagreement were used to assess several statements regarding donor reactions.

Results/Findings:

Six donor center technicians participated in the simulation course ranging in experience from < 6 months to > 6 years. All participants reported responding to a donor adverse reaction in the practice before attending the simulation course.

Comparison of the pre- and post-survey five-point Likert scale showed no change between statements assessing knowledge of how to recognize and treat a donor reaction with 100% of participants answering either agree or strongly agree in pre- and post-simulation surveys (Figure A, questions 2 and 3). However, only 83% reported agree or strongly agree with the statements assessing knowledge of predisposing factors and confidence in ability to manage a donor reaction in the pre-survey (Figure A, questions 1 and 4). In the post-survey, 100% of participants responded agree or strongly agree.

Conclusions: Simulation-based education for blood donor center technicians provided a practical, hands-on method of education that led to self-reported improvement in knowledge of adverse reaction risk factors and confidence in treating donor experiencing adverse reactions. Future studies with a larger sample size are necessary to confirm and improve the generalizability of these results. To our knowledge, this is one of the first reports of simulation-based education on adverse reaction for blood donor center technicians.