SMS Medical College’s blood banks collected 97,728 units of blood in 2025, but only 23,891 units came from voluntary donors. At 24.4% of the total, the figure shows how heavily the public hospital system continues to depend on replacement donations from the relatives and attendants of patients already facing medical emergencies.
The numbers matter because blood collection is not only a question of how much hospitals receive in a year. It is also a question of who is carrying the responsibility for keeping that supply available. At SMS Medical College, 73,837 units collected in 2025 were replacement donations from patients’ families and relatives. This means that nearly three-quarters of the blood collected by the institution came through a system linked to a patient’s immediate medical need rather than through regular, voluntary community donation.
That distinction places an additional obligation on families at the point when they are already dealing with illness, injury, childbirth, surgery or long-term treatment. A relative may be required to arrange a donor while also managing hospital admissions, treatment decisions and other costs. The replacement model helps hospitals collect blood, but it also shifts part of the responsibility for maintaining supply towards households connected to patients.
The seven blood banks functioning under SMS Medical College serve hospitals attached to the institute. Their requirements extend across trauma care, surgeries, cancer treatment, maternal care and other critical needs. According to the head of the Department of Immunohematology and Transfusion Medicine, Dr Dev Raj Arya, the hospitals also treat children with thalassemia and a large number of patients who require continuing access to blood.
Arya said SMS Medical College provides blood without replacement to thalassemia patients, pregnant women and other eligible categories. His statement points to an important feature of the system: demand is not limited to planned procedures. Blood is also required for patients whose treatment cannot be postponed, including trauma victims and women requiring maternal care. The institution therefore has to maintain stocks even when the people who need blood are unable to arrange replacement donors themselves.
The collection figures also show the limits of relying on donation camps alone. The department organised 426 blood donation camps in 2025 to increase voluntary collections. These camps represent a substantial mobilisation effort involving the medical college, voluntary organisations, non-governmental organisations, donor networks and camp organisers. Yet voluntary donations still remained below one-fourth of the total collection.
This gap is the central institutional issue revealed by the data. The system has an organised mechanism for collecting blood and has conducted hundreds of camps, but the resulting voluntary base remains too small compared with the requirements of the hospitals. The challenge is therefore not simply to hold more camps. It is to turn one-time participation into a broader and more dependable pool of regular donors.
The available figures do not establish why every potential donor does not return or why voluntary collections remain low. They do, however, show the consequence of the gap. In 2025, replacement donors supplied more than three times the number of units collected voluntarily at SMS Medical College. The imbalance leaves the blood banks dependent on patient-linked mobilisation even though their services cover a large and varied patient population.
The institutional response described by officials is focused on expanding the voluntary donor network. SMS Medical College is holding regular meetings with voluntary organisations, NGOs, donor networks and camp organisers. These groups are being encouraged to organise more camps, mobilise regular donors and widen the voluntary donor base so that government blood banks can maintain adequate stocks throughout the year.
This approach places coordination at the centre of the response. Blood banks require hospitals and donor groups to work together, but the two sides operate on different timelines. Hospitals need stocks continuously, including for emergencies and patients receiving ongoing treatment. Donation camps, by contrast, are periodic events that depend on the participation of organisations and eligible individuals at specific locations and times. The figures from SMS Medical College suggest that the current camp network has not yet produced sufficient continuity in voluntary collections.
The distinction between voluntary and replacement donation also affects how hospitals experience shortages. A replacement donation is connected to a known patient and is often mobilised because treatment requires it. A voluntary donation enters the system without being tied to an immediate request from one family. It can therefore help build a common pool for patients whose relatives cannot arrange donors or whose medical condition requires urgent access to blood.
That common pool is particularly relevant to the categories identified by SMS Medical College. Trauma patients may arrive without relatives who can immediately donate. Pregnant women may require blood during complicated care. Children with thalassemia may need repeated transfusions over time. Patients undergoing surgery or cancer treatment may also depend on the availability of compatible blood at the hospital. Arya’s statement indicates that the institution is already providing blood without replacement in some such cases, increasing the importance of a stable voluntary supply.
At the same time, the data supplied by the medical college does not provide a blood-group-wise breakdown, monthly collection pattern or stock-out record. It does not show how many donors gave blood more than once, how many camps were held at hospitals compared with other locations, or whether collections varied significantly across the year. Those details would be needed to assess whether the principal constraint is donor mobilisation, retention, camp distribution, seasonal variation or a mismatch between collections and clinical demand.
What is established is the scale of the dependence. Of the 97,728 units collected in 2025, 23,891 were voluntary and 73,837 were replacement donations. Voluntary donations accounted for less than one in four units, despite 426 camps and continuing engagement with donor organisations. The figures provide a clear measure of the distance between the institution’s collection activity and its goal of building a stronger voluntary donor base.
The issue also illustrates how public hospitals depend on networks beyond their formal administrative structure. SMS Medical College operates the blood banks, but voluntary organisations, NGOs, donor networks and camp organisers are essential to reaching donors. Patients’ relatives form another part of the collection system, particularly when a replacement donation is required. Hospital blood supply is therefore shaped by coordination between medical departments, community groups, families and eligible donors.
For patients, the difference between these channels is experienced at the point of care. A family that can arrange a replacement donor may help meet an immediate requirement. A family that cannot may face greater uncertainty while hospital staff work to allocate available stocks. The report does not provide data on individual delays or denied transfusions, but it establishes that the medical college continues to require blood for a broad range of critical treatments and is appealing for more eligible voluntary donors.
The larger urban question is whether a major public medical institution can maintain essential treatment capacity when its blood supply remains closely tied to the relatives of current patients. Jaipur’s SMS Medical College serves patients requiring emergency, surgical, maternal, cancer and long-term care. Its experience shows that the reliability of urban healthcare depends not only on hospital buildings, equipment and clinical staff, but also on the strength of the civic systems that supply them.
The 2025 collection figures confirm both the scale of SMS Medical College’s blood collection operation and the weakness of its voluntary share. The next phase of the institutional effort will involve more coordination with voluntary organisations, NGOs, donor networks and camp organisers, along with attempts to mobilise regular donors. Whether those measures reduce the dependence on replacement donations will depend on the ability to expand and sustain voluntary participation throughout the year.
