[Histonet] CRE: JAHCO vs. CAP

[Morken, Tim]

Yes, we do that...

You pay your money and they send the materials.

JC accepts CAP as the proficiency provider.

JC is more oriented to the whole system rather than just the lab. JC is not as specific towards lab technical issues as CAP is. They use "tracers" to follow everything done to and for a patient in the system. In the lab that means ensuring your QA/QC system is airtight. They can look at ANYTHING related to a given test - reagent QA, technologist training/proficiency documentation, instrument records, QC documentation, etc. They want to see how well you follow a QA/QC system. 

No downside, just a bit different than CAP.


Tim Morken
Supervisor, Histology / IPOX
UCSF Medical Center
San Francisco, CA  
 

-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu [mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Martin, Gary
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 12:17 PM
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] JAHCO vs. CAP 

We are having a discussion about switching our inspection process form
CAP to JAHCO. One of our questions is,  can we still participate in the
proficiency testing through CAP> If anyone has done this can you explain
the process and the upside and the down side.  

Thanks 

Gary M. 

_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet