Procedural errors in antibody identification

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Immunohematology

American National Red Cross

Subject: Medical Laboratory Technology

GET ALERTS SUBSCRIBE

ISSN: 0894-203X
eISSN: 1930-3955

DESCRIPTION

5
Reader(s)
5
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue / page

Archive
Volume 37 (2021)
Volume 36 (2020)
Volume 35 (2019)
Volume 34 (2018)
Volume 33 (2017)
Volume 32 (2016)
Volume 31 (2015)
Volume 30 (2014)
Volume 29 (2013)
Volume 28 (2012)
Volume 27 (2011)
Volume 26 (2010)
Volume 25 (2009)
Volume 24 (2008)
Volume 23 (2007)
Volume 22 (2006)
Volume 21 (2005)
Volume 20 (2004)
Volume 19 (2003)
Volume 18 (2002)
Volume 17 (2001)
Volume 16 (2000)
Volume 15 (1999)
Volume 14 (1998)
Volume 13 (1997)
Volume 12 (1996)
Volume 11 (1995)
Volume 10 (1994)
Volume 9 (1993)
Volume 8 (1992)
Volume 7 (1991)
Volume 6 (1990)
Volume 5 (1989)
Volume 4 (1988)
Volume 3 (1987)
Related articles

VOLUME 7 , ISSUE 1 (March 1991) > List of articles

Procedural errors in antibody identification

Patricia L. Strohm / Philip J. Smith / Jane M. Fraser / Thomas E. Miller / Sally V. Rudmann / Jack W. Smith, Jr. / John R. Svirbely / Janice F. Blazina / Melanie S. Kennedy

Citation Information : Immunohematology. Volume 7, Issue 1, Pages 20-22, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/immunohematology-2019-1005

License : (Transfer of Copyright)

Published Online: 14-December-2020

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

In experimental studies of students and line technologists perfoming antibody identification procedures, both groups made errors. These errors included, at times, either failing to identify an antibody or misidentifying the specficity(ies). A prospective study was undertaken to identify errors made in a laboratory setting. Errors were classified as 1) failing to follow protocol (procedural error) or 2) arriving at the wrong answer (misidentification error). Over a 1-year period, 1,057 workups were reviewed. There were 41 (3.88%) procedural errors and no misidentification errors. In 25 workups (61% of errors), the selection of cells to rule out underlying alloantibody(ies) was in error. The remaining 16 involved various “slips” (minor mistakes or memory lapses) and clerical errors. Based on an analysis of the probable causes of these errors, potential solutions include 1) developing computer aids to detect “rule-out” errors or missing tests results; 2) providing timely, careful review of workups before transfusion; and 3) designing better panel layout and cell selection.

You don't have 'Full Text' access of this article.

Purchase Article Subscribe Journal Share