Blood transfusion – an integrated part of a National Health Care system? Pros and cons

Department:      World Health Organization
Supervisor:       Prof. C. Th. Smit Sibinga MD PhD, FRCP Edin, FRCPath

In many countries blood transfusion is still performing the role of Cinderella of the health care. Budgetwise it is often given the remains of the Health Care budget and attention wise it is regarded a necessity, but not an essence in the Health Care System.

Blood transfusion is just a part of a larger entity named Transfusion Medicine.

Transfusion Medicine is a bridging science and practice, linking the clinical care in the hospitals (demand) with the healthy community (supply). It consists of three major elements – the community to provide the source material to be collected from selected healthy and low risk groups; the hospitals with the clinical care, the consumer side represented by the prescribing clinicians; the blood establishment responsible for the collection, processing and testing, storage and distribution of safe and efficacious blood components to the hospitals. The provision of safe blood is necessary to allow clinical hemotherapy, rationally practised, monitored and evaluated for its outcome (hemovigilance).

So, Transfusion Medicine encompasses both social community-oriented sciences and bio-medical sciences as an holistic example of health sciences.

Pros – What arguments can be given in favour of blood transfusion as an integrated part of the National Health Care System? What consequences would such approach have for the organization and implementation of the National Health Care System?

Cons – What arguments can be given against integration of blood transfusion in the National Health Care System? What consequences would such approach have for the operations and financing of the national blood supply?