Re: [Histonet] QC labeling

From:Rene J Buesa

  Short answer, yes!
  I used to keep a file for each HT, and in it everything was written down: the good, the bad, the uggly; trainings, commendations, attendance, you name it.
  It was updated everytime anything worth mentioning took place, from commendations from the pathologists for good sections, staining, whatever; as well as any mistakes, not only dealing with mislabelling, but with poor quality of sections, floaters, as I wrote, every thing.
  Come the evaluation day all those things, good and bad, all documented AT THE MOMENT THEY HAPPENED, not after the fact, we weighed and most certainly affected the evaluation, either positively or negatively.
  Once that evaluation was completed, signed, agreed or disagreed, that annual file was incorporated to the personal file, and a NEW file was opened for the next evaluation period.
Since all issues were addressed immediately they happened or were found, I never had a single case of a HT saying: "I did not know about that", they knew and received retraining if necessary.
  René J.
Marcia Funk  wrote:
Histo Friends,

I have a few questions I would like to see how labs are following through with labeling errors?

Case number placed on slide during sectioning. Slide is then mislabeled handed off to pathologist.
Pathologist discovers the error. Slide is labeled incorrectly. 

Wrong label placed on slide during labeling. Pathologist discovers mislabeld slide

Errors are place on QC log at the end of day. These are errors that are caught in the department
by the tech or pathologist. Do most labs keep a log with errors by tech and how many errors
impact there eval ? 

I would appreciate your imput.

Histonet mailing list

Building a website is a piece of cake. 
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
Histonet mailing list

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>