Jump to content
PathLabTalk

Oniononorion

Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2
  • Country

    United States

Oniononorion last won the day on March 9 2020

Oniononorion had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Occupation
    MLS(ASCP)

Recent Profile Visitors

358 profile views
  1. That’s a really good point Ward_X. Emergent events documented in the EMR should be enough to justify our actions in the case of unXM’d blood. I have never thought of the possibility that that would suffice as documentation for this purpose but requiring docs to sign papers really does seem a little archaic after thinking of it in terms of all the information that is available to us in the EMR to prove who requested it, but we in the blood bank are so used to having >complete documentation of everything. But this also can never be assumed as not everyone is so meticulous....
  2. I just answered this question. My Score PASS  
  3. I just answered this question. My Score FAIL  
  4. I just answered this question. My Score PASS  
  5. It would behoove you to keep it. Reason being, a unit in your care was issued before all required testing was performed. Even if the blood was returned, you need to keep the documentation as to why it was released from your electronic inventory record. Now, say you issue a cooler full of an MTP pack and as the nurse is walking away, they cancel the MTP. The nurse returns the cooler, it doesn’t even make it to the floor, and you haven’t sent the slip for the physician’s signature yet. In that case, it could be a little redundant to make them sign a form for a nonexistent MTP, so I would ju
  6. srichar3, do let us know results of other tests and if the patient was treated as AsubB for transfusion. I’m curious as to why the patient would have such a strong reaction with A reverse cells if they are a subgroup (I have only seen 1+ in reverse with A cells in subtypes but of course YMMV) and wonder if perhaps there is some pertinent clinical information causing false positive results with anti-A in gel, such as pH- or reagent- dependent reactivity. Especially since it was just BPos in tube method.
  7. Following the manufacturer’s IFU (Ortho; tube method), when performing antigen typing for CEce, we test IS, followed by RT incubation, mix, centrifuge, grade. For Jka/b, Lea/b, K and P1 (procedure is the same, except these have no IS read prior to incubation), we incubate, do not mix (as mixing after incubation is not mentioned in the IFU), centrifuge, grade. So, per manufacturer’s instructions, we mix before and after RT incubation for CEce testing but not for the other direct agglutination reagents, where we only mix before incubation at RT and spin without mixing. Does this n
  8. Oh gawwsh I wish we could count on school to teach us the intricacies of immunohematology but it seems these things are truly only taught by 1) loads of experience; 2) engaging with those who have loads of experience; and 3) reading seriously in-depth reference texts. A bit off topic, but traditionally MLS schools teach immunohematology as one, one-semester course with lab plus clinical rotation. While the clinical rotation solidifies the theory a lot more than the class, I believe our graduates would benefit from a second “Immunohematology II” class covering practical basics such as the
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.