R1R2

Sounds like a leaky segment. Do you get the bag back so you could investigate? I would document this incident as a safety event.

Anytime you add humans to the process you will have manual result entry errors and WBITs. My suggestion is to document the errors and discuss with you one up and quality person. You are doing a lot of TASs to warrant an interface IMO.

These are just a couple of CAP requirements that deal with result review: GEN.43825 Result Verification - Manual and automated result entries are verified before final acceptance and reporting by the computer. An audit after the fact would not satisfy this requirement. COM.04100 Deals with Supervisory Result Review and all results need to be reviewed within 24 hours if high complexity testing is performed by trainined high school grads. It would also be a good idea to audit a percentage of results after the fact too if you are manually entering results into an LIS.

can we assume you are doing serological crossmatches on everyone (which would confirm your 1 and only blood type, sort of)?

I just answered this question. My Score FAIL  

I am OK with ruling out the presence of anti K with single dose cells. I think I have seen anti K showing dosage only 1x in all m years of BB.

THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION

Stupid question - why is group O whole blood better than group O pack cells and group A thawed plasma?

sounds neat and tidy. No handwriting anything!

and a blood warmer would probably be over kill in this case

Does your laboratory staff have the necessary procedures to follow for this scenario? I think flow charts work very well for things like this.

HI Kathy, any follow up for this patient?

Am I the only one that thinks that performing lot to lot with ABLA Q is not required?

plain bags here.

I am not a BBer and don't have a policy to share but I am sure others here can share.