RE: Automation of special stains
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
|From:||"Tom T. McNemar" <TMcNemar@lmhealth.org>|
|To:||'Mary Stevens' <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Tom T. McNemar" <TMcNemar@lmhealth.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org|
With regard to the cost of automation vs. a tech......
The instrument is not intended (at least in my lab) to replace a
tech but to assist them. We have 3 full time people (including myself). As
our workload increases and I am spending less time at the bench, we need to
free up people for other things. As for the cost, the purchase is a
one-time expenditure not counting expendables. Hopefully, if you've got a
good tech, you'd like to keep them for a number of years, pay them that
$30,000 plus raises and benefits. Seems like a pretty fair trade-off to me,
more time, more work, more efficiently and increased revenue.
Tom Mc Nemar
Licking Memorial Hospital
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nails, Felton L. [SMTP:flnails@TexasChildrensHospital.org]
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 9:04 AM
> To: 'Mary Stevens'; TMcNemar@lmhealth.org; email@example.com;
> Subject: RE: Automation of special stains
> I have demoed the Nexus and the biogenex and will soon demo the cytologics
> I have found that the kits are very expensive and the nexus can only do 20
> slides at a time plus they didn't have kits for all the stains that we
> perform here, so therefore it wouldn't free up a tech.
> I am at a lose at how people in histoland are justifying purchasing a 50
> thousand dollar machine in place of a 30 thousand dollar tech.
> automation would be a great debate topic.
> Felton L. Nails
> Anatomical Pathology Manager
> Texas Children's Hosp.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mary Stevens [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 2:35 PM
> > To: TMcNemar@lmhealth.org; email@example.com;
> > firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Subject: Re: Automation of special stains
> > We're currently demo-ing (is that a word? it is now....) auto stainers
> > special stain purposes. We typically perform the Goldner's trichrome,
> > VonKossa. And will also incorporate any H&E's and the Saf O eventually.
> > We typically run large batches of Sp. stains, so my comments are for
> > stainers only.
> > so far we've tested the Leica, we liked it. Also have the Shandon and
> > Sakura to evaluate. In my opinion, they will all perform what we need
> > them to do - I already checked them out at NSH. they are easy to
> > and run, will do large numbers of slides and at least 2 different
> > stains will fit the number of baskets each has. We could probably run 3
> > sp stains if needed. Each runs multiple stains and baskets at the same
> > time.
> > Good luck.
> > Mary
> > >>> Susan Meloan <email@example.com> - 3/15/2000 10:24 AM >>>
> > Last summer we had a demo machine- Ventana Nexus. I was very skepital
> > when I agreed to demo it, but was very surprised at the consistent
> > and ease of use. I hated to lose the machine when it came time to give
> > up. The hospital did not budget for the machine, but all in all it was
> > very good asset while in the lab, and would certainly have automated
> > routine stains, allowing more work per technician.
> > Susan Meloan
> > Chief Histotechnologist
> > Department of Pathology
> > Medical College of Georgia
> > Augusta, Ga 30912
> > (706) 721-3630
> > e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > >>> "Tom T. McNemar" <TMcNemar@lmhealth.org> 03/15 7:36 AM >>>
> > Hello everyone! Does anybody have any experience with using automation
> > perform stains like Trichrome, Alcian-Blue Pas, Grocott's Methenamine
> > Silver, etc.? I would appreciate any input you may have.
> > Tom
> > Licking Memorial Hospital
> > Newark, Ohio
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>