Direct thermal vs thermal transfer label printing

[cac]

Currently we are using thermal transfer but are considering switching to direct thermal for printing ISBT labels. In addition to RBC's and platelets we make FFP, Cryo, freeze and deglyc. I would appreciate any feedback pro or con for using the direct thermal printing.

[Richard Kriozere]

A word of caution: Is this new direct thermal label paper or a synthetic? Obviously paper will not have the durability needed for water, refrigeration, freezing, potential bleach disinfecting or exposure to other solvents. Abraision during shipments and longer term storage, etc. may not be good for any paper product and with any direct thermal there is potential degradation (paper or synthetics). Direct thermal is not generally acceptable in any application requiring long term storage since it is affected by UV from sun or fluorescents, water, solvents, high temperatures and abraision. The image may fade or degrade and no manufacturer will guarantee long term storage and use. THERE IS A REASON BOTH PRODUCT TYPE EXIST.

A properlly matched synthetic with a thermal transfer resin ribbon has been used by blood banks for 25 years now with an amost perfact record of durability with both bar code and eye read reliable quality. You can use one type media in your printers and be assured of proven great quality all the time.

DIrect thermal may be okay in the short term and paper products. With paper, either thermal or transfer, may also get by in the short term, but in a highly regulated industry with high value blood products does the small potential saving have that great a value versus a time tested technology.

Back in the late 80's the American Red Cross ran side by side comparisons of Direct and Thermal Transfer against the FDA 1985-89 Guidelines and the ARC protoclos and found thermal transfer printing on synthetic face materials with full resin ribbon to be the most satisfactory technology for the riggors of blood banking.

Richard