Elizabeth Pailloz

We use saline and all units are single donors here are a few but several other also. E3078 IRRADIATED E3047 E3080 IRRADIATED E3049

We use Thermosafe coolers and we palce HEMOTEMP indicators on each units. Cooler were ordered from FISHER and they were validated with Blue packs for over 16 hrs at temp. We allow them to remain out for 8 hrs to OR cases. I would be interested to hear from anyone regarding the documentation that is sent with these cooler. here is link http://www.fishersci.com/ecomm/servlet/fsproductdetail?storeId=10652&productId=1094703&catalogId=29104&matchedCatNo=22031878&fromSearch=1&searchKey=coolers||blood||cooler&highlightProductsItemsFlag=Y&endecaSearchQuery=%23store%3DScientific%23nav%3D0%23rpp%3D25%23offSet%3D0%23keyWord%3Dblood%2Bcooler&xrefPartType=From&savings=0.0&xrefEvent=1356116999238_0&searchType=PROD

Oh I titled it that because I posted it in CHemistry forum where we BBers are " out of step "with the CLIA regs and feel more at home with FDA/AABB. My hope was to discuss this Pathologist signing issue with Chem or Gen lab folks who may already be experienced with this regulation and have already "lived thru" this . Glad you liked my pun..unfortunately no one answered ...

Blood Banker here asking about some very LAB specific quality issue. Hope you can help! There is a recent push to have all of the Blood Bank SOPs signed by the CLIA stated lab director every two years. Ths is in addition to our SOPs being signed by our own Blood Bank medical director every year. The BB director is NOT on the CLIA cert. Supposedly this is a CMS/CLIA issue that is filtering down thr AABB/CAP. Has anyone else incorporated the signing of ALL Blood Bank SOPs by the Pathologist stated on CLIA cert?

Blood Banker here asking about some very LAB specific quality issue. Hope you can help! There is a recent push to have all of the Blood Bank SOPs signed by the CLIA stated lab director every two years. Ths is in addition to our SOPs being signed by our own Blood Bank medical director every year. The BB director is NOT on the CLIA cert. Supposedly this is a CMS/CLIA issue that is filtering down thr AABB/CAP. Has anyone else incorporated the signing of ALL Blood Bank SOPs by the Pathologist stated on CLIA cert?

I can state from much experience, in the PEDIATRIC world you must be tenacious in obtaining the history directly from each and every hospital that the baby set foot into. So far you have the birth hospital and one hospital to investigate. Maybe dad took her to another hospital and no-one bothered to ask him?!! I would be calling each hospital's Blood Bank ( please know as BABY names can change several times with each admission to each hospital, confirmatory identification of your patient is your biggest battle). Key point to check in her pre transfusion specimen: antigen typing for E and Jka/ were these + or MF? That would be pivotal information to know. You mentioned the E and Jba in eluate...hmmm....what did they ID in plasma...nothing.....something else...hmmmm??? Out there ideas : IVIG/Vaccinations cause all sort of funkyness/autoImmune disease state Hope this is helpful Elizabeth.

Having worked with all of the following systems(hemoCare/MediTech/SunQust/Cerner) my 2cents is Sunquest is a very good LAB system and an average/fair Blood Bank system. I agree that the many, many many code make initial Blood Bank education challenging. The builds of the products,QA failures, flags overrides are individualized and therefore very trickyand require almost continual maintenance (as others have pointed out). As SQ progressed into the Windows versions which they call (GUI Versions 6.0 and up) ISBT issues are still lacking. Conversely, when MICRO went GUI their inital version came with the cool clicks and whistles . BB GUI 6.0 went live bare bones several years ago with the "promise" of full ISBT functionality with 6.2, no really 6.3, no realy, really 6.4. Decent system but it seems like whatever improvements you are looking forward to...just seem to be a few upgrades away....for a cost$$$.

Back to the original post......What shall BronxBommer do? My advice is simply to print this thread and slide it under the doors of the non-acting parties involved . You may want to add a note that states that this is what the blood banking community thinks....:cool: Then exile them from the Island...LOL.

Pediatric facility here who utlizes only SDPs for all patients. We dose by volume in the tiny, tiny patients getting less than 55ccs. SPlit off the parent unit into either bags or syringes via a Sterile docker. For kids getting over 55 cc, splits go into aliqout bags and are dosed by 1/4 unit , half unit, or full unit based upon volume tolerated for child and size of orignal unit. Once we split a SDP we try to utilize it as best we can and have much more opportunity to give to other small volume patients. We try our best NOT give the remaining parent as a FULL unit dose unless the need is urgent. Ie 275 cc parent with 50 cc taken out is now 200cc "piece": not really a full or a half, but could be further split into other pieces.

Same observation here but I was just alerted yesterday. Yes very interesting .

I have been thru this transition 3 times now and have come to believe that it is best to make a clean break from tube to gel. Our recent decision was to transition everything to gel and "TURN OFF" all tube testing. We just switched to GEL her in late Sept and are very satisfied with all aspects of performance. In a previous hospital,, staff were allowed to use both methods and this caused a good bit of variation between techs, specimens and the results. Who got a negative in tube . then another tech would get a 1+ in gel......GRRRRR After 2 or three examples like that, it was easy to see that one method is best. If you choose to keep the tube screen: i agree thst utilization of two or three cells off of the 3% panel would work well and would ned to be QCed with each use, not daily.