Jump to content

John C. Staley

Members
  • Posts

    1,481
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    176
  • Country

    United States

Other groups

Staff Writer

John C. Staley last won the day on May 20

John C. Staley had the most liked content!

About John C. Staley

  • Birthday 12/17/1953

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Bird Dog training, hunting and fishing.
  • Location
    Evanston, WY
  • Occupation
    Retired Clinical Laboratory Scientist 35+ years with most of those supervising blood banks and transfusion services in 250+ bed level II trauma centers.

Recent Profile Visitors

5,187 profile views

John C. Staley's Achievements

  1. I never considered keeping the opened segment used for the crossmatch. While I can understand the idea behind it I personally consider it over the top in our blood bank paranoia. Each segment in the line can be positively linked to the unit transfused and that should be all you need.
  2. Thanks Malcolm. It's sad to see the passing of another Blood Banking great.
  3. I'm going to be blunt. This is ridiculous!! You have the potential of causing far more problems by removing the cubes from their protective container.
  4. Just a thought but, might that not be a little problematic if there is an issue with the reagents? I know it's one of those "what if" questions that never happens but I couldn't help my self. To be honest, it's been long enough I don't remember what we did but something tickles the back of my brain making me think we did some form of on receipt QC but I'm certain it was not overly extensive or burdensome.
  5. Personally I always considered the human interaction to be part of the equation for performing QC. I don't recall anything that specifically stated that but I could not see where the human was not an integral part of the process. So in my lab the manual method would be QC'd as well. Your secondary methods only need to be QC'd on the day of use.
  6. I agree 100% for all the same reasons.
  7. I'm looking forward to hearing what you discover.
  8. I'm just curious, what makes you ask this? Did someone inadvertently put some platelets in a refrigerator?
  9. I must agree with exlimey. See if you can identify it if at all possible before assuming it is not a problem just because it is cold reacting. If the decision becomes transfuse or die before it can be identified then suggest running the blood through a warmer and hope for the best.
  10. When I first read this post yesterday I was tempted to answer but thought I would wait to see what Malcom had to say. Glad I waited. My thoughts were much the same but Malcolm presented it in a much more succinct and detailed manner. As expected I have nothing to add other than my agreement .
  11. John C. Staley

    Inspections

    I still remember my first AABB inspection and yes, they were called inspections way back then. I wish I had this info back then. The most difficult thing for me to learn was when to STOP talking.
  12. Ensis01 you expressed my thoughts far better than I ever could have. I've never been a fan of blood bank specific arm bands and fought against them most of my long and storied () career. Complicating a process never made it better and often made the problems far worse than the one folks are trying to address. My answer to glewis is that this is a perfect time to get rid of the blood bank specific armband. Let the computer and nurses do their jobs in the simplest most efficient way possible.
  13. If trained and documented there is no reason I know of saying phlebotomists can't perform therapeutic phlebotomies. At a previous facility there were all done by phlebotomists and the the techs were thrilled.
×
×
  • 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.