[Histonet] CAP Survey Question

[joelle weaver]

Looking at each slide ( at least controls) is required here, period, for everything. I do not see how  sending out stains that didn't work  and the rework and would save time? Maybe I missed some point in the thread?  
I don't see how you could learn without this QC practice, even better if you can review under the microscope with a pathologist. 




Joelle Weaver MAOM, HTL (ASCP) QIHC
 
From: joelleweaver <@t> hotmail.com
To: amosbrooks <@t> gmail.com; histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: RE: [Histonet] CAP Survey Question
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 13:04:01 +0000




I agree. It is required here on everything. 




Joelle Weaver MAOM, HTL (ASCP) QIHC
 
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 17:50:47 -0500
From: amosbrooks <@t> gmail.com
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] CAP Survey Question

Hi,
    Regarding the question of weather it would save time to not have the techs QC check the IHC slides. I feel that it would be an extremely bad practice to omit the techs from the QC process. This goes for not only IHC but special stains and even H&E stains. It is imperative that the techs know what the slides they are submitting look like. It is possible for even a lowly tech to spot a problem before passing the slide on to a pathologist. And even pathologists are capable of missing something from time to time. This also educates the tech so that when a pathologist has a question about a stain he is not met with a blank stare. So CAP requirement or not it should be done anyway.
 
Just my opinion,
(But I'm right),
Amos

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