[Histonet] (no subject)

[joelle weaver]

What I did recently for two new processors, conventional type-
I  did parallel trial slides of multiple tissue types ( same types as patients)  for fixation, morphology , processing artifacts for 9 programs.
I grossed them in and recorded fixation times, type, thickness,  overall dimensions. I ran on the test programs. Then I embedded and sectioned and evaluated the  results by microscopic review by techs & then the medical director of  the H & E stained sections for each program and tissue type. Looking at any autolysis, nuclear detail, poor dehydration, other processing problems in each set. 
 
Then I just made a simple evaluation sheet for any tissue processing related issues, with a number rating/scale for the results. Retained records of the validation runs and the stained sections used for validation. Defined acceptable tissue types  and dimensions for the processing programs in the SOP,  and then I just created back up/recovery procedure and reprocessing procedure and ran through those for comparison. When completed, I just compiled into validation summary report. 




Joelle Weaver MAOM, HTL (ASCP) QIHC
 
> From: LMurphy2 <@t> aultman.com
> To: Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 15:26:17 +0000
> CC: 
> Subject: [Histonet] (no subject)
> 
> How is everyone validating the tissue processor for new CAP ANP.23045 question on function and verification of equipment?
> 
> 
> 
> LeAnn Murphy
> 
> Aultman Hospital
> 
> Canton, Ohio
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet