Blood transfusion is associated with many risks, especially exposure to blood transfusion-transmitted infections considered one of the main causes of death worldwide, including hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The threat posed by blood-borne pathogens is disproportionately high, especially in developing countries, so there is a need for continuous monitoring of blood transfusions to prevent transmitting diseases. Rapid diagnostic immunochromatographic technique (ICT) methods are the most widely used methods in developing countries, although ELISA and molecular testing are considered more accurate worldwide. Therefore, the study aimed to compare the analytical sensitivity between rapid tests and the ELISA method for detecting HBV, HCV, and HIV infection among blood donors. Four hundred (400) blood donor samples were tested using the Rapid Test Kits (INTEC, SD, ABON, and CLUN), and the ELISA method was used as a confirmatory test. Out of 400 blood samples tested for viral infection, HBV, HCV, and HIV were detected in 8, 10, and 2 samples, respectively, using the ELISA technique. This study observed that the rate of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), in addition to determining the diagnostic accuracy rate and error rate for all rapid diagnostic kits in detecting HBV, HCV and HIV are less accurate and associated with more false negatives compared to the ELISA technique. This study showed a significant difference in sensitivity between ELISA and rapid diagnostic immunochromatographic technique (ICT) groups; therefore, rapid diagnosis is not suitable for testing the quality of infectious markers for blood donors.