mini panel for passive Anti-D

[tbostock]

Is a D-negative antibody screen acceptable for a facility which does not perform antibody identification?

No.  You would still need to detect a real Anti-D.

[Mabel Adams]

So, according to the reference above, screening cells are required to have the D antigen on them. Thus you would get a positive screen with these patients when you run your usual cells, regardless of whether you ran the additional cells.  Can you still call it another antibody screen if you run the @ cells as a follow up to the original screen cells?  Hmm.  If you have to call the screen positive, does your computer allow you to proceed without doing an ID on a positive screen?  You can run just the @ cells as an antibody ID, I'm sure, as long as you can rule out all of the "usual suspects" and you don't need to prove the ID of the anti-D.  Whether you can call running those additional cells a "screen" I'm not so sure.  You probably don't want to get into having to do IDs because of having to do PT for them etc.  I guess if you did the CAP TM PT you would have to mark that you would refer it out for all of them because you would not have a known anti-D in your "patient".  It would be such a logical, time-saving thing to do, but I am not sure that you can pull it off.

[Ruth Hugeback]

Thanks for your input.  Terri, to be clear, I would want to use the D-negative, antibody screen only for patients which documented, recent RhIg injection.  At that point, the Anti-D is not an unexpected antibody.  As Mable say, it would be time saving in a critical situation.  It is far too logical to be acceptable.