[Histonet] Cutting standards

Fri Aug 27 10:39:16 CDT 2010

This question keeps coming up with increasing frequency. There have been a few articles trying to suggest standards, but because Histology is not a "standardized" process, you must develop your own standards in your lab.

I suggest the minimum set of variables you need to take into account are: specimen type mix; grossing protocols (number/amount of tissue placed in a cassette); embedding protocols (how tissue is placed in mold); experience of techs (include everyone performing the task)

You will need to do a time study that will cover all techs and over several days. Don't use average, use mean. Set the mean as the minimum performance expectation and standard, re-time the task anytime one or more of the variables changes, combine performance with your quality standard and adjust minimum standard accordingly.

If you set standards in your lab, you must make sure of two important factors. First, make the standard fair and equitable for all. Second, make sure your standards meet and support your production and quality needs.

William DeSalvo, B.S., HTL(ASCP)

> From: histotech <@t> imagesbyhopper.com
> To: lblazek <@t> digestivespecialists.com; sgoebel <@t> xbiotech.com
> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:10:32 -0400
> Subject: RE: [Histonet] Cutting standards
> CC: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> 
> :o) Okay, to clear something up, I am using the times as a AVERAGE for
> cutting and embedding over the course of the day. I do understand that
> there are easy blocks and difficult ones and the average between them! If I
> am to tell a tech they could work faster/more efficiently etc, I would feel
> better if I have some sort of a standard goal which they can aim for, hence
> the reason for my question. 
> 
> And no, I'm not being hard core! ;o) CAP even asks if there are standards
> set for your techs.
> 
> I'm enjoying the discussion and thank you all for taking the time to help.
> :o)
> 
> Michelle
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blazek, Linda [mailto:lblazek <@t> digestivespecialists.com] 
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 10:31 AM
> To: 'sgoebel <@t> xbiotech.com'; histotech <@t> imagesbyhopper.com
> Cc: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> Subject: RE: [Histonet] Cutting standards
> 
> 
> I'm up for the Margaritas! 
> I agree with the 45 seconds at cutting a block is not a good time measure.
> I think that if you are including cleaning the edges of the block, facing
> the block, making a slide for the block etc. then 2 minutes is a good
> average. I think years and years ago that was what one of the time studies
> I participated in figured was an average time. However, I don't think
> timing someone that cutting is a very good practice with all of the
> variables involved. I think rather than timing someone I would rather, if a
> tech seems to be very slow, observing why that particular person is
> significantly slower than others and see if there is a way to increase their
> productivity. 
> My two cents worth! Now you have four cents!
> 
> Now! Anyone looking for a job in the Dayton, Oh area? I have an opening
> for a tech. We have a great team and state of the art equipment.
> 
> Linda Blazek HT (ASCP)
> Manager/Supervisor
> GI Pathology of Dayton
> Digestive Specialists, Inc
> 7415 Brandt Pike
> Huber Heights, OH 45424
> Phone: (937) 396-2623
> Email: lblazek <@t> digestivespecialists.com
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> [mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of
> sgoebel <@t> xbiotech.com
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 10:11 AM
> To: histotech <@t> imagesbyhopper.com
> Cc: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> Subject: RE: [Histonet] Cutting standards
> 
> 
> Wow, you time your techs!?! Hard core!!! 45 seconds t=mbed
> sounds ok, but 45 seconds to section? What if the tissue need=
> little extra care? Some are harder and some are fatty. If I=ly
> had 45 seconds to cut a giant hunk of breast that would be alot of pr
> essure!!! Just remember crap in crap out...sometimes you have to
> take=ittle longer to do it right with one try instead of taking
> extra time t=o something you rushed again. Just my two cents?
> =)
> 
> <=v>Happy Friday everyone...margaritas after work!!!
> 
> Sarah Goebel, B.A., HT=SCP)
> Histotechnician
> XBiotech USA Inc.
> 8201 East Riverside Dr. Bldg 4 Suite 100
> Austin, Tex= 78744
> (512)386-5107
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [Histonet] Cutting standards
> From: <[1]histotech <@t> imagesb=opper.com>
> Date: Fri, August 27, 2010 6:50 am
> To: <[2]histonet <@t> lists=tsouthwestern.edu>
> I know this question has been asked before ... Can anyone share with
> me wha=
> they are actually using as a cutting/embedding standard for your
> techs? Fo=
> instance, how many seconds (mins?) do you allow for embedding a block?
> How many seconds(mins?) do you allow for cutting a block?
> For simplicity here, I am looking at the "plop and drop" type
> specimens, ie larger specimens that don't require specific
> orientation and can be
> placed<=> in a mold easily. These types of blocks will generally
> have one section on one slide. I am trying to find out if the standard
> I have for my techs
> is<=> too tough or too lenient on them. I allow 45 seconds to embed
> such a block and another 45 seconds to section that same block.
> How does that fit with what you guys are all doing?
> Thanks!
> Michelle
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> [3]Histonet <@t> lists.utsouth=stern.edu
> [4]http:=lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
> 
> References
> 
> 1. 3D"mailto:histotech <@t> imagesbyhopper.com"
> 2. 3D"mailto:histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu"
> 3. 3D"mailto:Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu"
> 4. 3D"http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet"
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.441 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3097 - Release Date: 08/27/10
> 06:34:00
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet