Posted October 28, 20177 yr comment_71340 Has anyone had success with Adobe or even Excel in creating QC entry forms for antigen typing? We are loosing Meditech in the Spring and have had that option-love it! Now we are faced with going back to paper, which no one wants to do.
May 31, 20223 yr comment_83563 Hi @Dkadrums, were you able to find the form you were needing? If so, would you be able to post an update on your solution? I've used Excel for this, but only to create the template since there has to be a way to ID the work back to the tech, and inspectors don't like typed initials as 'proof' an individual ran the testing (especially if it's something that can be edited). Dropping this into Adobe would be better if you can require the form be digitally signed.
June 15, 20223 yr comment_83661 On 5/31/2022 at 7:29 AM, OneMore said: . . . inspectors don't like typed initials as 'proof' an individual ran the testing (especially if it's something that can be edited). How can you prove anyone did anything? Unless you watch. Inspectors cannot impune your work is bogus based on your process, unless something seems amiss. I would immediately contact their regulatory agency and ask for the official stance on such and/or a replacement inspector.
June 15, 20223 yr comment_83662 In the UK, unless a piece of work (such as running positive and negative controls) is signed and dated by the person carrying out the work, it is regarded as not having been done in the first place. While I am not, by a long way, in favour of everything suggested by either "Internal Quality", or "External Inspectors", in this I stand four square with them. On the other hand, when they prescribe what colour ink we should use, they can go take a running jump, as far as I am concerned.
June 16, 20223 yr comment_83670 I like the not black or red ink logic; all other colors clearly indicate an original document and not a photocopy. As long as it is permanent and waterproof any other color or shade of ink works. I personally like weird blues Edited June 16, 20223 yr by Ensis01
June 16, 20223 yr comment_83672 1 hour ago, Ensis01 said: I like the not black or red ink logic; all other colors clearly indicate an original document and not a photocopy. As long as it is permanent and waterproof any other color or shade of ink works. I personally like weird blues I agree. I like the blue ink option because it used to be an obvious indication that the document is the original. Now, with color photocopiers in widespread use, I have to double check. Sneaky !
June 16, 20223 yr comment_83674 8 hours ago, exlimey said: I agree. I like the blue ink option because it used to be an obvious indication that the document is the original. Now, with color photocopiers in widespread use, I have to double check. Sneaky ! Never yet seen a color photocopier at any place I have worked
June 17, 20223 yr comment_83676 14 hours ago, Ensis01 said: Never yet seen a color photocopier at any place I have worked Our machine is a combo color printer/photocopier/scanner. Just like most "multi-tools", it's OK, but doesn't really do all of its tasks exceptionally well. Grey shading often comes out bluish and when it scans colored materials, the colors are badly translated. Ho-hum, First World problems. Edited June 17, 20223 yr by exlimey
August 22, 20222 yr comment_83915 I've used Excel for this for many years and at different facilities. Never had inspectors questions digital initials/dates as we have change tracking and correction clearly outlined in SOP and turned on change tracking in Excel, with edits logged at the bottom of the form. I find it so nice because you can add conditional formatting such as the QC result can turn red if not within range and it is so much easier for me to do review without having to gather everything. Lab Director review can be done at their desk or remotely as well! It's very convenient.
Create an account or sign in to comment