Leaderboard

Unfortunately the answer is, it depends... If the anti CD47 is a human antibody, then it will cause a positive DAT as CD47 is expressed on most cells in the body including erythrocytes. If the anti CD47 is mouse or goat then it will not as this antibody will bind to CD47 but will not cause the same interference we see with Daratumamab. I believe recent therapies involve blocking some of the CD47 receptors.

Having managed many different teams and mentored new leaders for years, I suspect from the posts that your team does not feel that you respect them or their experience. Despite their behavior (and I agree with David about accountability and documenting unacceptable behavior or practices) you need to make them feel heard and valued. Try and include them by discussing the need for change and soliciting their opinions. When they are involved they then have ownership. Then perhaps (no guarantees) the behavior will start to change. Being "the boss" is not for wimps!

Yes I agree!! This is how I found about this website and I just loved it

Thanks Malcolm Enjoy your holiday! !!

A few comments: first, I really like what was said above about this being a pubic forum. You don't want your employees seeing comments like that. Second: if you are in charge then YOU are in charge. Set the ground rules and enforce them. You will need your Medical Director to back you up. Blood Bankers are notorious for not letting go, esp the older ones (like me). If you feel your techs are not able to perform up to their performance programs document, retrain, document - once they see you documenting things they will get the hint. Don't let them boss you around. Ask them what the procedure says. That's why there are manuals. If you think they are busting your chops, keep a record and then you can "retrain" as indicated but you also have a record for competencies at evaluation time - but you must make the effort to provide retraining. If they balk, document . . . It's a fine line to walk. When you have more management experience you will understand. In many instances we were promoted to management because we were good serologists . . . suddenly we had to learn to handle people - a whole different ball game. To the person that started this post: getting calls at all hours is part of being in charge of the BB. On the off shifts, I have found that a bit of extra time for training goes a long way in reducing the calls. No matter how simple the procedure seems to you, esp if you are dealing with generalists, and it is something that occurs infrequently. Don't make it so they don't call when they really should. If you have a dedicated BB staff it might be a different story.

We are using an Echo and have been for the last approx 8 years. We had been using manual gel prior to that and I switched us to solid phase because I got tired of having to resort to tube/PeG to resolve weakly reactive antibody IDs that gel couldn't quite pull off. Our contract is up for renewal in the next year, so I'll take a look again at what's out there in the automation world. Right now I'm not very inclined to make a switch because of the following... Do we get some non-specific reactions with solid phase/Echo? - Yes, but in our patient population its not a real burden. Do we ID some antibodies that are weak to non-existent with tube/LISS or tube/PeG? Yes, absolutely and I believe that based on our original validation, for us solid phase was more sensitive than gel. Do CAP survey results show equivalent performance between all methods? - Based on past survey results, the Echo performs well, perhaps a bit better than other automated methods. We haven't had any survey failures using solid phase and the Echo. (To be fair, there could be human factors that cause the outliers with other methods.) Ease of use and training new staff - no problems. Good workflow and good speed - Yes. Good customer service from Immucor - Yes. Generally satisfied - Yes.

We have looked at both pretty extensively. I preferred the Erytra mainly because I think that their gel wouldn't pick up as many false positives as Ortho's. There are more "bells and whistles" on the Vision so evaluate how they fit your needs. I am not ready to run gel titers so that is not a great value to me, especially because it would use up a lot of reagent cells when it runs, I think, 12 dilutions on every titer. Maybe there will be a software fix later that will let you run fewer dilutions. Grifols is still getting reagents released in the US so they don't have everything you might want yet. Last I heard they have only a single 0.8% panel through approval. If you will use the instrument for your high throughput testing and do follow up testing manually, that is fine. If you want to put panels A,B,C and Ficin on the machine, you will have to wait a while for Grifols, although the Vision can do this (pay attention to onboard stability times). Examine how the specimens and reagents are accessed in each machine (carousel vs. slide-in racks) and think if that will make any difference in your operation. It might be different for generalists who pop into BB to run something on nights than for a fully 24/7 staffed BB. Be sure to get the vendors to help you with site visits so you can see them in operation and talk to real users. We were also allowed to have a manual workstation for a week so we could run comparison gel testing in both manual systems. We found that helpful.

Hemo bioscience is selling ready to use DTT ( frozen), see our web site for details.