Jump to content
MOBB

Computer Crossmatches and Revised CAP regs

Recommended Posts

This "Note" to the CAP TRM.40670 requirement is lifted straight out of the FDA Computer Crossmatch Guidance of April 2011, page 6.  

I don't know of any BECS smart enough to block the computer crossmatch for these cases of ABO typing discrepancies, so we will have to rely on a policy statement in our procedure(s).  

I agree that this does not add value to patient safety, but rather confuses the poor bench tech with another If...then...policy statement in the procedure.  Thanks MOBB for posting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


So in a follow up conversation with Amy from CAP, she said CAP was working to revise the wording next year to clarify that unresolved/unexpected ABO discrepancies require a serologic crossmatch. Resolved issues are not disqualified.

I called again today to get clarification on many of the revisions and I was told that CAP does not define an ABO discrepancy and if my policy defines an ABO discrepancy as one that is unresolved/unexpected we can carry on with business as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone listen to the Sept 20 CAP webinar that was mentioned below for standard changes? Was any clarification given?  Do you know if it was recorded and can be accessed through the cap WEBSITE?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2017 at 12:01 PM, Patty said:

Did anyone listen to the Sept 20 CAP webinar that was mentioned below for standard changes? Was any clarification given?  Do you know if it was recorded and can be accessed through the cap WEBSITE?

They didn't discuss any of the transfusion medicine changes, only said there were many updates. It was a pretty big waste of time.

I don't know if they recorded it.

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Similar Content

    • By MARINA
      We just had an API AFB survey where the specimen was put on the back of the slide... Not the labeled side. After the staining process, the specimen circle didn’t take on any color and nothing would come in focus. I stained the other side and sure enough, positive!!!! API’s response, is we should notice where the specimen is regardless of the labeling!
    • By Eagle Eye
      Per the CAP requirement, highlighted items are added. We are using very small label with SOFTBANK which has minimum requirement. (first four items)
      How is everyone complying with below requirement.
      1) Are you changing your label size?   Thanks


    • By Sherie Bruns
      Do the Blood Bank refrigerator and freezer have to be externally monitored outside of the blood bank?  The lab is staffed 24/7 and able to respond to the freezer or refrigerator alarm.  Does security or the Emergency Department have to also externally monitor these alarms?  Are there any CAP or AABB standards, or does the FDA require this?  Just wondering since it seems to be redundant, and we have an older freezer which may be difficult to hook up.
    • By heathervaught
      I need some guidance!  I did a quick search of the forums for any discussion about this, and the most current posting was in 2010.  I'm wondering if anyone has any new information, new experiences, or any advice about CAP TRM.40120.  The note states "...all analysts participate in QC on a regular basis."
      How frequently is "regular"?  For example, when I was looking to complete our annual Competency assessment in September (don't ask...), I was looking for evidence that each individual who performs MTS testing had performed MTS QC.  There were some employees who had not performed MTS QC yet in 2016.  I'm inclined to say that someone who hasn't performed QC in at least 8+ months is not participating in QC on a regular basis.  Being new to my role, I'm just not sure how the assessors interpret this standard, and how others provide evidence of compliance. 
    • By DPruden
      My interpretation of these two standards is that eye protection must be made available and instruction on proper use must be given to all the techs.  But not that goggles/glasses must be worn at all times in a clinical laboratory regardless of the risk of splash/spatter/aerosol formation. 
      Do your facilities require that techs wear eye protection at all times or only when performing tasks that have a high risk for exposure?  Thanks!
      GEN.74100: Appropriate personal protective equipment (gloves, gowns, masks and eye protectors, etc.) is provided and maintained in a sanitary and reliable condition in all technical work areas in which blood and body substances are handled and in circumstances during which exposure is likely to occur.
      GEN.74200: Personnel are instructed in the proper use of personal protective clothing/equipment (e.g. gloves, gowns, masks, eye protectors, footwear) and records are maintained.
  • 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.