Jump to content

Ab ID interpretations


Mabel Adams

Recommended Posts

For at least the 26 years I have worked here when we turned out an antibody ID, we included statements about the % of units compatible, whether it is clinically significant, and , if an appropriate patient, whether it is known to cause HDFN. In the old days this was a form letter from the pathologist, so you could argue that it was a true "path interp." I guess. It got turned into canned comments when we went to a computer system.

Does anyone else do this? I wonder if it is time to stop except in unusual cases where more explanation is needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We currently only report the antibody and a chartable comment regarding the need to allow us extra time... If the % compatibility is low, I usually mention it over the phone to the physician or nurse.

We have considered giving an antibody card to patients who have a significant antibody. We never developed a good mechanism of when to send it, how to avoid sending multiple cards to the same patient, how to provide an explanation, etc. I think it is a good idea, working out the logistics have just gotten lower on the totem pole I guess.

So back to your original question, we typically only send out a letter when a pregnant woman has an antibody, clinically significant or insignificant, with an explanation. This is generated by the supervisor, the pathologist is not involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do this as part of our original antibody ID reporting. We generate them from "canned comments" or as we now know them in Misys "English Text Codes". The last comment is "To Be Reviewed by Pathologist". This then goes to a pathologist who reviews, dates, and initials the comment. In Misys 6.2, we will be including this comment as part of the Blood Bank Administrative Data file so information is readily available to the tech performing Blood Bank testing. We find it relatively easy to do and good documentation.

Belva in Lincoln, NE

For at least the 26 years I have worked here when we turned out an antibody ID, we included statements about the % of units compatible, whether it is clinically significant, and , if an appropriate patient, whether it is known to cause HDFN. In the old days this was a form letter from the pathologist, so you could argue that it was a true "path interp." I guess. It got turned into canned comments when we went to a computer system.

Does anyone else do this? I wonder if it is time to stop except in unusual cases where more explanation is needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We send a newly ID'd antibodies back to our pathologists for a consult. I have worked places that did not do this, but at my current hospital, they always have, so I just continued the practice.

I would guess doctors are likely to read comments from the pathologist.

LF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 years later...

Sorry for the late post (years later) but I was browsing and saw this question. Mable our late pathologist used to do as yours. It was always beautifully written. Full of great information that only a true blood banker could appreciate. Our 'new' pathologists are way too busy for that but will answer any questions that any physician has about an antibody identification but boy I miss those Path reviews .... just reminiscing about the good ol' days!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Advertisement

×
×
  • 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.