Hello All

Coming from a GLP environment this type of equipment validation is standard in 
our setting.  This is just my opinion but I think the CAP checklist is moving 
towards the type of equipment documentation that is already required in a GxP 
or ISO environment.  I always thought that instrument qualification (IQ) - 
operational qualification (OQ) and process qualification (PQ) or simply stated 
IQ/OQ/PQ were used only in GxP settings but you now see some of the larger 
clinical labs running these types of validations on their equipment and 
processes.  To me it does make sense that some type of equipment validation 
should be required whether it  is a two page document on the microtomes, 
waterbaths, etc. or complete IQ/OQ/PQ's  on major pieces of equipment such as 
tissue processors, immunostainers and IHC retrieval units.  I believe that all 
of these are important processes that should be completed in histology 
laboratories today.    We are a GLP compliant lab and every single piece of 
equipment is calibrated and validated as designated in our Master Validation 
Plan.  IHC stainers and retrieval units should be validated, even our 
refrigerators and freezers are calibrated and validated.  Our pipettors are 
calibrated quarterly, and any piece of equipment that generates a weight or 
temperature is calibrated yearly.  

For example if you do not validate your IHC retrieval units how can you really 
tell if they reach the temperature that they are programmed to reach, does the 
temperature stay consistent through the retrieval process, did it retrieve for 
the time programmed?  The only way to determine this is to perform a 
validation.  How do you troubleshoot problems if you do not know if your 
instruments are performing to their specification without testing those 
specifications - that's what equipment validation is and that's why in my 
opinion its important.  

Histology laboratories are now responsible for running IHC that directly 
effects a patients treatment - meaning the numerous therapeutic and prognostic 
markers we routinely run now.  Validation is an important process especially if 
you are using image analysis for these markers.  I hate to say it but we better 
get used to it, because this is not going away.  

And now the shameless plug -  I will be giving a 90 minute lecture at the 
Florida State Meeting  
https://classic.regonline.com/custImages/240000/241449/FSH2014OnlineProgram.pdf 
on this exact topic, so if you want to learn how to create a Master Validation 
Plan and learn how to perform a basic validation or a more detailed IQ/OQ and 
PQ and to what extent you need to validate a particular piece of equipment -  
sign up for the meeting plus there are lots of other great topics being 
presented too.

Liz 

Elizabeth A. Chlipala, BS, HTL(ASCP)QIHC
Premier Laboratory, LLC
PO Box 18592
Boulder, CO 80308
(303) 682-3949 office
(303) 682-9060 fax
(303) 881-0763 cell
l...@premierlab.com
www.premierlab.com

March 10, 2014 is Histotechnology Professionals Day

Ship to Address:

Premier Laboratory, LLC
1567 Skyway Drive, Unit E
Longmont, CO 80504


-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu 
[mailto:histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Martha 
Ward-Pathology
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 1:22 PM
To: Cynthia Robinson; Terri Braud; histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] RE: Instrument Verification

I'm with you.   There really appears to be no value to this particular 
requirement.    I would only be concerned with it if I had just purchased it, 
or moved it into our lab from another location.


 
Martha Ward, MT (ASCP) QIHC
Manager

Molecular Diagnostics Lab
Medical Center Boulevard  \  Winston-Salem, NC 27157 p 336.716.2109  \  f 
336.716.5890 mw...@wakehealth.edu  
 
 



-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu 
[mailto:histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Cynthia Robinson
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 3:03 PM
To: Terri Braud; histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] RE: Instrument Verification

I agree with you in that CAP is just looking for things to change and doesn't 
seem to be considering the change and decrease in staffing seen in clinical 
settings. Cryostat validation? Really....cut a slide after you have cleaned and 
pm'd the thing and go on. Good grief...I don't need any more paper and 
documentation on routine processes. As for tissue processors, I have 20 year 
old VIP's that have been running and producing specimens acceptably. I did 
validate them prior to being put in use but we didn't document like we do now. 
And I don't see the need to do it at this stage of use. We did do a very 
extensive validation on the Peloris we put into use last year and will going 
forward on new equipment.  To me the daily QC of stain should provide our 
'validation' of the process and include the processor. I am interested in 
others thoughts as well.

Thanks for allowing me to rant.

Cindi Robinson, HT(ASCP)
Mercy Medical Center-Sioux City
Dunes Medical Laboratories
350 W Anchor Drive
Dakota Dunes SD 57049




-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu 
[mailto:histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Terri Braud
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 1:00 PM
To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] RE: Instrument Verification

I just received my midcycle CAP and for cryostat validation, we are planning to 
cut and stain a piece of frozen tonsil and have the path sign off on it. For 
the tissue processors, we will run a one minute test program. I hope this will 
fly.  Is it just me, or is CAP insanely out of control with new or modified 
regulations and policies for AP?  

Terri L. Braud, HT(ASCP)
Anatomic Pathology Supervisor
Holy Redeemer Hospital Laboratory
1648 Huntingdon Pike
Meadowbrook, PA 19046
Ph: 215-938-3676
Fax: 215-938-3874

6. Validation of cryostat (Gloria Tharp)

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 09:59:26 -0500
From: "Gloria Tharp" <gth...@pcasoutheast.com> Could anyone tell me how you are 
handling the new CAP ANP.23045 question on function and verification of 
equipment regarding a cryostat.
Gloria Tharp, BA, HTL(ASCP)
------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 15:26:17 +0000
From: "Leann M. Murphy" <lmurp...@aultman.com> 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
************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:

This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which 
it was sent. It may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential, 
and the use or disclosure of such information may also be restricted under 
applicable federal and state law. If you received this communication in error, 
please do not distribute any part of it or retain any copies, and delete the 
original E-Mail.
Please notify the sender of any error by E-Mail.

Thank you for your cooperation.


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

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


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

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

Reply via email to