R1R2

I was not going to say that I promptly threw it in the circular file because I was afraid of being "shamed" for doing so but I threw it in the circular file promptly.  

Are you sure that the survey is required by the FDA?
 
I remember one from a few years ago and it was from the AABB and not required so I did not do it.
 

I was not going to say that I promptly threw it in the circular file because I was afraid of being "shamed" for doing so but I threw it in the circular file promptly.  

I was not going to say that I promptly threw it in the circular file because I was afraid of being "shamed" for doing so but I threw it in the circular file promptly.  

I was not going to say that I promptly threw it in the circular file because I was afraid of being "shamed" for doing so but I threw it in the circular file promptly.  

as well as you and your family Malcolm

One reason may be that a lot of labs can't afford a staff member to "disappear" for awhile.  
 

I think upon hire.   Not really a competency, more like training.
 

I implemented training for the couriers.  It was a PPT that their boss gave them to read and sign off on.   Basically, go directly to department promptly, avoid hot or cold temps, give to responsible person. 

I agree.  
 

I have seen dosage a couple of times and a >K reacting at room temp only.   I agree with Malcolm and his reasoning why K+k- cell is not required to rule out >K. 

I agree with Malcolm. In theory, there may be examples of anti-K that only react with K+k- cells, but in practice it's a very rare event.
One of my former colleagues/mentors once said that one shouldn't worry about missing a weak antibody. If the patient were unfortunate to be transfused antigen-positive blood, the former weak antibody would be super-strong next time around !!! Problem solved.

That is what my former supervisor used to say (he was a tech for over 50 years)!  Get the titer up where you can work with it!  God rest him!

I have seen dosage a couple of times and a >K reacting at room temp only.   I agree with Malcolm and his reasoning why K+k- cell is not required to rule out >K. 

I have seen dosage a couple of times and a >K reacting at room temp only.   I agree with Malcolm and his reasoning why K+k- cell is not required to rule out >K. 

Congrats!!!  
If by "weak antigen positive; unable to isolate" you mean positive antibody screen unable to determine specificity - I would not worry about this.   There are many reasons for a result like this., too many to go into detail.   IF you are in  the US, the methods used in antibody screening and detection are very good but false positives do occur.  A repeat at 16 weeks is a good idea.  Don't worry and keep us posted.   

The INR is a largely useless predictor of bleeding risk except for those on coumadin/warfarin, and not so good a predictor in those patients.  It is known that the range of 2-3 is a reasonably safe and effective one for anti-coagulation to prevent recurrent thrombosis (usually DVT or PE).  Beyond that, INR numbers like 6 or 12 tell us next to nothing except that factor VII is quite low, which may or may not be clinically important.  The INR of liquid plasma or FFP is around 1.6-1.8, and is not affected by the citrate anticoagulant, since exogenous excess calcium is added in the performance of the INR.  INRs of 1.5 to about 2.0 are not associated with substantial increases in bleeding, either spontaneous or procedure related, and do not need to be corrected at all, in my view, and this opinion is supported by an extensive observational literature.  FFP will not correct such an INR in any case, and thus represents risk without benefit.  Medical specialty society recommendations for INRs of 1.5 prior to procedures are without any evidence support whatever, and represent old, no longer valid expert opinion.
 
If an INR needs correction for any reason, factor concentrates are more effective and less likely to harm the patient than FFP. FFP should never be used to reverse warfarin/coumadin in my opinion, because of these efficacy and safety issues.  Unfortunately factor concentrates are also much more expensive than plasma/FFP.  However, this considers only the cost of the product, not the cost of any clinical complications such as thrombosis, volume overload, ICU admission, etc., not to mention death, all of which are more likely with plasma/FFP.  Meta-analyses of randomized trials of FFP vs. factor concentrate, demonstrate that FFP is associated with a two fold mortality increase. 'Nuf said.  One ICU admission for a few days can balance the increased costs of factor concentrates for the overall health system. Factor concentrates, preferably II, VII, IX, X concentrates that also contain some protein S and C; in the USA=Kcentra; in Europe=Beriplex are preferred over three factor concentrates, but both are superior to FFP.

Congrats!!!  
If by "weak antigen positive; unable to isolate" you mean positive antibody screen unable to determine specificity - I would not worry about this.   There are many reasons for a result like this., too many to go into detail.   IF you are in  the US, the methods used in antibody screening and detection are very good but false positives do occur.  A repeat at 16 weeks is a good idea.  Don't worry and keep us posted.   

this frequency increases as it gets closer to the end of the shift and time to go home in my experience. 

this frequency increases as it gets closer to the end of the shift and time to go home in my experience. 

This may be reportable to the FDA as well since AHG crossmatches were not performed. 

this frequency increases as it gets closer to the end of the shift and time to go home in my experience. 

this frequency increases as it gets closer to the end of the shift and time to go home in my experience. 

this frequency increases as it gets closer to the end of the shift and time to go home in my experience. 

this frequency increases as it gets closer to the end of the shift and time to go home in my experience.