Patient History check on Prenatals

[AMcCord]

We check for previous record on all specimens except for cord blood samples (which we check the mothers on). We cannot accept reports from physician offices.....I have an entire stack of incorrect ABO/Rh results on OB patients. Not that we would accept them in the first place.

 

Same for us - including the incorrect types from the physician offices.

[goodchild]

We check history on everything, what we're looking at with this checklist requirement is what should be done with prenatal patients that you have no previous history on.

 

 

We have same process. Enter disclaimer.

 

 

So you agree that the standard says we should be providing a disclaimer if our previous history check shows no history?

 

I'm hoping we can come up with an easy IS solution for this issue if that's the direction we go in.

[Sandy L]

Regarding the question posed by Goodchild, "So you agree that the standard says we should be providing a disclaimer if our previous history check shows no history?"

 

No, but that actually was our original interpretation of this CAP requirement when it was first published (2002).  We had a rule written in our BB LIS.  We have a History Check detail in our ABO/Rh that we answer and if we answered "No Previous HX", the rule would add a disclaimer that stated something to the effect that "No history of a previous result existed to verify the result".   This was in 2002 and I don't remember the exact wording.  After discussing with CAP, we determined that this was intended for "reference" type labs that really had no good way of checking previous history since they got samples from many, many other labs.  Those labs that had no capability of performing history checks at all needed to put a disclaimer on their results.  I am sorry that I don't have the 2002 documentation of this interpretation from CAP, but you could call them and see if that is still what they intended.  Currently we just result a history check as "No ABO in history" or "Previous ABO in history".  We reflex an ABO/Rh retype for a second sample collection when we answer "No ABO in HX", but we only actually draw the retype if it is a compatibility sample.

[goodchild]

Regarding the question posed by Goodchild, "So you agree that the standard says we should be providing a disclaimer if our previous history check shows no history?"

 

No, but that actually was our original interpretation of this CAP requirement when it was first published (2002).  We had a rule written in our BB LIS.  We have a History Check detail in our ABO/Rh that we answer and if we answered "No Previous HX", the rule would add a disclaimer that stated something to the effect that "No history of a previous result existed to verify the result".   This was in 2002 and I don't remember the exact wording.  After discussing with CAP, we determined that this was intended for "reference" type labs that really had no good way of checking previous history since they got samples from many, many other labs.  Those labs that had no capability of performing history checks at all needed to put a disclaimer on their results.  I am sorry that I don't have the 2002 documentation of this interpretation from CAP, but you could call them and see if that is still what they intended.  Currently we just result a history check as "No ABO in history" or "Previous ABO in history".  We reflex an ABO/Rh retype for a second sample collection when we answer "No ABO in HX", but we only actually draw the retype if it is a compatibility sample.

 

Thank you Sandy, that's perfect. I'll give them a call for more information.