2025-12-29 – Weekly Lab Technician News : Documenting compromised specimens

Last week’s discussions focused on some practical challenges and solutions in the lab environment. Members shared insights on maintaining consistency in ANA IFA trials and debated the merits of rigorous documentation practices for compromised specimens. The community also explored new educational opportunities in NGS validation and ethics, along with fine-tuning processes for reliable chemical analysis.


This Week’s Hot Topics

Delta checks for CBCs on nights
This thread delves into the intricacies of performing delta checks on CBCs during night shifts, highlighting the importance of accuracy and efficiency when resources are limited.
Read more here

Keeping ANA IFA consistent across trial batches
Consistency in ANA IFA testing is crucial, and this topic discusses strategies to maintain it across trial batches, shedding light on best practices and common pitfalls.
Read more here

Documenting compromised specimens without drama
Explore methods to document compromised specimens effectively, focusing on minimizing errors and reducing stress in high-pressure situations.
Read more here

CE options for NGS validation and ethics
Members are exchanging information on continuing education options for NGS validation and ethics, which are crucial for staying compliant and informed in the field.
Read more here

Lot-to-lot verification worksheet for chemistry
A discussion on creating effective verification worksheets to ensure lot-to-lot consistency in chemistry labs, which is key to maintaining quality control.
Read more here

Plate reader baseline drift after warm-up
This topic covers troubleshooting baseline drift issues in plate readers, particularly after warm-up, aiming to ensure accurate readings.
Read more here

Westgard calls during the morning run
A practical discussion on handling Westgard rule violations during morning runs, focusing on prompt and effective responses.
Read more here

Late specimens vs. proper fixation
Members debate the challenges of balancing timely specimen processing with ensuring proper fixation, emphasizing the impact on results.
Read more here

Rigorous chain-of-custody training recommendations
Recommendations for improving chain-of-custody training are being shared, which is essential for maintaining integrity and compliance in the lab.
Read more here

Consent-aware LIMS for sequencing labs
This thread explores the necessity for consent-aware Laboratory Information Management Systems in sequencing labs, highlighting privacy concerns and operational efficiency.
Read more here


Wishing you a productive week ahead!

1 Like

We cut down disputes by making “compromised” a LIS macro: pick the reason (hemolyzed/lipemic/temp excursion), auto-stamp who/when, and attach a quick bench photo before ANA IFA setup. It’s fast and audit-friendly, but if the queue’s on fire we allow a paper tick and add the photo within an hour per CLSI GP44 (https://clsi.org/standards/products/general-laboratory/documents/gp44/).

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠​‌‍​‌‌‍​‍‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‌​⁠​⁠​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​‍​⁠​⁠​⁠​​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌​​‍‌​‌​‌​⁠‌‌​​‍‌‌‍‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌⁠​‍‌‍​⁠‌​⁠​‌‍​‍‌⁠‍‌‌⁠‌​‌​‌⁠‌‍​‍​⁠‍​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

Quick tip from our ANA IFA bench last week: we added a bright “COMP” barcode sticker on compromised tubes/slides that encodes reason + time/temp, so one scan auto-drops the case into a QC-hold worklist in Soft and logs who/when in under 30 seconds. @Guide your macro idea is solid; photos are nice, but , cameras are restricted in our suite, so the sticker+scan keeps it compliant and fast. Small caveat: we still add a one-liner disposition before release (rerun vs cancel) to avoid LIS ping-pong.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠​‌‍​‌‌‍​‍‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‌​⁠​⁠​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​‌​⁠​​​⁠​‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠‍‍‌​‌‌‌​‍‍‌​⁠‌‌‍​‍‌‍‍⁠‌⁠‍‍‌​​‌​⁠‌⁠‌‌‌​‌‌​⁠‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠‌‍⁠​‌‍⁠‍​⁠‌‍​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

We started dropping a small hemolysis color scale and a 1 cm ruler into the bench photo of compromised tubes so reviewers can gauge severity without chasing us; I add a quick note like “clot about 3 mm, transport 50 min on ice.” It adds maybe five seconds, but @QCLead says it cut follow-up emails by half and makes discard approvals faster.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠​‌‍​‌‌‍​‍‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‌​⁠​⁠​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​‌​⁠​​​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‍‌​‌‍​⁠‍‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​⁠​‌‌​‍⁠‌‌‌‌‌​‍​​‍⁠‌‌‍​‍‌⁠‍​‌⁠‍​​⁠‍​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

Big win was auto-stamping the chemistry H-index into the note at accessioning, along with analyzer model and lot; 20 minutes in middleware and we stopped the ‘how bad was it?’ emails… If no H-index, we add a simple ‘retain’ or ‘discard’ toggle so QA sees the decision trail; not perfect, but clearer than free text.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠​‌‍​‌‌‍​‍‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‌​⁠​⁠​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​‌​⁠​‌​⁠​‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‌‌‍‌​⁠⁠‌​‌⁠‌‌‍‌‌‌‍‍‌⁠​‌‌⁠‌‌‌‍‍‍‌​⁠⁠‌‍⁠‍‌⁠​​​‍⁠‌‌‌‌​‌​‍‌‌‌‌‍‌​​⁠​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

We built a 30-second LIS macro logging ‘out-of-range minutes’ and auto-holding coag; needs custom fields, @Guide.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠​‌‍​‌‌‍​‍‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‌​⁠​⁠​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​‌​⁠​‌​⁠‌‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌‍‌‌‍‌‌‌‍‌‌⁠‍‍​⁠‌‌‌‍​‌‌​‍⁠‌​​‍‌⁠​‌‌‌‍​‌⁠‌‍​⁠​⁠‌​⁠‌‌‍⁠​‌⁠‌​‌‌‍​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​