4 hours ago, SMILLER said:

I do not think that it's really that hard to get consistent results from tech to tech with tube testing. But it requires adequate training and oversight, just as you need for automated testing, in order to provide appropriate patient care.

Interesting note above about platelet-poor-plasma and gel though.

Scott

Scott, I mostly agree with you but I would add one more caveat, adequate training, oversight AND practice/consistent use of the skill.  If you have staff that seldom to rarely rotate through the department their skills will diminish and as far as oversight, no one likes working with someone constantly looking over their shoulder.  

To respond to Cliffs comment, you are absolutely correct, no technique is perfect.  If it were everyone would be doing it the same way.  One technique will fit a certain situation better than another but not technique addresses the needs of everyone.  

We perform Electronic Crossmatch at our facility, and the computer differentiates antibodies as clinically significant or not clinically significant.  Even if the antibody is not considered significant, it is set to not allow EXM if the present antibody screen is positive.  We don't consider anti-D from a documented, recent RhIG administration clinically significant so as not to brand the lady with an anti-D forever.