applejw

I'm a huge fan of dedicated BB staff for larger facilities. Currently, only day shift is comprised of dedicated staff and 2nd and 3rd shift manned by generalists who work in at least one other specialty. With a 6 on/8 off schedule, some of the 3rd shift work only 1-2 days per month and are VERY uncomfortable given that we are a Level 1 trauma center, large outreach services and serve as the "reference" Blood Bank for 7 other satellite hospitals. Turnover is a problem on 3rd shift because of the extra stress caused by only being scheduled 1-2 days per month and being responsible for at least h

I'm back at this question and it's been over a year. Current discussion is whether to continue with Typenex bracelets for RBC transfusions or.... no Typenex bracelet requirement. We are in discussions with other facilities within our system who only use Typenex bracelet for patients who are unidentified or have other "identity discrepancies" - we are all moving to Softbank within the next 6 months. I'm looking for both Pro and Con opinions to bring to the workgroup. If you know of any literature on this subject, references are great. I would like for the group to make a system dec

The requirement to perform a donor retype also plays into whether or not the LIS is used for electronic compatibility testing. AABB 5.16.2.4 The system contains logic to alert the user to discrepancies between the donor ABO group and Rh type on the unit label and those determined by blood group confirmatory tests and to ABO incompatibility between the recipient and the donor unit. * *FDA Guidance for Industry: Computer Crossmatch"

I highly recommend having a separate product build for convalescent plasma - enough so that it clearly distinguishes the order from a routine thawed plasma product. If you don't, beware of the possibility that a random donor plasma can be substituted for convalescent plasma especially if you don't have a lot of COVID19 patients receiving this product.

We have just implemented this in Epic. Haven't gone through an inspection yet but I can't see that the FDA would have a problem with it as it is documenting a medical decision.

We have added the AABB attestation statement regarding the release of uncrossmatched, emergency released blood to an Epic order that is electronically signed. We still send a form but it is more of a back-up now for those instances where the MD did not sign the form from the OR and once the patient has been transferred, it is virtually impossible to find someone willing to sign the form after the fact.

Repeat testing used the cells that were originally placed on the Vision for compatibility testing . These were incompatible using the lavender-top tube but compatible when tested with the 2nd pink top. I think that, whatever the cause , the answer is found with the 2nd pink top tube. Two possible scenarios: 1) 2nd pink top collected from a different patient who coincidentally was also B POS and in the ER around the same time 2) Antibody titer decreased due to transfusion or dilution. At this point, it is a conundrum and might be academic but an interesting story. Thank you,

So, this patient was initially seen as a trauma with an unidentified "identifier". The 2nd sample labeling was verified (by several people including myself) - collected at a different time according to the label. Patient's initial sample was B POS and this sample was also B POS. It is always possible that the second sample was collected from a different trauma patient in the ER that was also B POS around the same time but, because of the probability of another B POS patient in the same vicinity in the same time period, I don't believe that is the cause but cannot exclude this possibility. T

I initially thought that some of the antibody would be adsorbed onto the transfused positive cells but wasn't sure if that would be enough to completely remove the reactivity - but apparently it sure helps!

Situation - RBC and plasma issued emergently to patient. 2 units RBC and 2 units plasma transfused in ER. Testing on patient specimen drawn pre-transfusion showed 2+ reactivity with screening cells and anti-K1 was identified. When performing compatibility testing, the 2 transfused RBC were compatible when tested on the Vision using a 2nd specimen collected after the original specimen used to perform Type and antibody screen (insufficient plasma remaining from pre-transfusion specimen to perform any additional testing). After performing antigen testing on all units, unit #1 was tested as K1

We routinely test cord blood samples on Vision. We do not autoverify results from the instrument so are required to check results before crossing over interface. Requirement to perform weak D testing is verified on daily work review.

Update: Blood supplier now short on blood transport boxes - especially platelets.

We are in South Carolina.

Today, we received notification that our blood supplier will no longer be entering the hospital building. We are expected to meet the courier outside to take delivery of the shipment. Additionally, we will be charged for each of the shipping boxes since they are no longer going to be re-used. Has anyone else encountered this as part of our brand new CoVID-19 world?

When do you perform an elution? (e.g. all positive DATs, all positive DATS within 3 months of transfusion, IgG positive only) Positive DAT with anti-IgG if being tested as part of transfusion reaction investigation or antibody identification or at physician's request. Positive DAT with neonates are called to the provider and eluate is required if no history or Mom has positive antibody screen or there is no ABO incompatibility between baby and Mom What method is utilized for the elution? EluKit II What method is utilized for testing the eluate? Gel or modified AHG in tube