RE: [Histonet] QC on stained slides
You have included all the criteria; fixation, processing, embedding, microtomy, staining, coverslipping and labeling. If you were able to submit slides to CAP under their HQIP program, you would get graded evaluations. Short of that, could you perhaps send out duplicate slides to another local lab, or sister hospital, for peer review? You could offer to exchange slides on a twice yearly basis, since they, too, may be looking for additional quality control. -Original Message- From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu [mailto:histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of louise renton Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 2:25 AM To: Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu Subject: [Histonet] QC on stained slides Hi all As part of a self assessment programme conducted by my employer, and related to my performance review and salary adjustment, I need to determine the criteria of what makes a stained slide acceptable or unacceptable. I was wondering if anyone out there had a checklist that they would be willing to share, that i could perhaps adapt. I realise that the easiest would be to send slides out for external control, but in this case it is not feasible. What I put together is this: - Quality of decalcification, processing, infiltration - Quality of sections (no wrinkles, missing bits, scores etc) - Entire representation of tissue area - staining pattern as expected according to protocol - coverslipped without bubbles or other inclusions - labelled neatly and correctly but, the question inmy mind is what would be the criteria that would make a slide merely adequate or truely outstanding? PLease help thank you -- Louise Renton Bone Research Unit University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg South Africa +27 11 717 2298 (tel fax) 073 5574456 (emergencies only) There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls. George Carlin No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced. ___ 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
Re: [Histonet] QC on stained slides
Thank you for your very helpful suggestionsThe situation here is a little weird as I am the only one doing the sectioning in this unit (research unit), and mostly i look at my own slides to do histomorphometry...so I have to grade myself??!!! Oh well, we do the best we can best regards On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:05 PM, WILLIAM DESALVO wdesalvo@hotmail.comwrote: Attached is a copy of the QA sheet that I provided at one of my NSH presentations. Review and use as needed. I believe your question of what makes a slide adequate or superior may be the wrong question. As long as you have a subjective review with a wide and varied specification, it will be extremely difficult to set a scoring process that will provide the desired feed back. I suggest you might want to approach in a different way and look at the number of defect or unacceptable products produced as compared to an agreed upon and high standard. use a Six Sigma tool to help you. I suggest you need an opportunities for improvement procedure and use the Defects per Million Opportunities (DPMO) tool. This will provide a process to evaluate the performance above and below standard in a simple and efficient manner. Your goal is never to deliver adequate work to your customer, the pathologist, but to always deliver the highest quality of work. You cannot improve the quality of work produced unless you know what is not meeting standard, not what is adequate or superior. Whether it is one person or multiple people working in the lab, there will always be variation in the product delivered because it is a manual process. You always want to reduce and narrow that variation to maintain the highest and consistent quality. But to narrow the variation you must have a standard and the standard must be agreed upon by the persons producing and the persons reviewing the work. I believe using a Six Sigma tool will provide you with the feedback you require and help you maintain the highest quality of slides delivered to the pathologists. Standardize your procedures and protocols, develop standards (highest quality standards) w/ your pathologists and then document, review, track and trend defects to improve the process. The data collected will give you specific information as to how you have performed to standard combined with the specific number of units produced by you (quality and quantity combined). This process will also allow you to compare multiple individuals working in the department and compare those individuals to each other. Everyone will be evaluated according to standards set for the work produced, plain, simple and effective. *William DeSalvo,* B.*S., HTL(ASCP)* * * Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 09:25:07 +0200 From: louise.ren...@gmail.com To: Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu CC: Subject: [Histonet] QC on stained slides Hi all As part of a self assessment programme conducted by my employer, and related to my performance review and salary adjustment, I need to determine the criteria of what makes a stained slide acceptable or unacceptable. I was wondering if anyone out there had a checklist that they would be willing to share, that i could perhaps adapt. I realise that the easiest would be to send slides out for external control, but in this case it is not feasible. What I put together is this: - Quality of decalcification, processing, infiltration - Quality of sections (no wrinkles, missing bits, scores etc) - Entire representation of tissue area - staining pattern as expected according to protocol - coverslipped without bubbles or other inclusions - labelled neatly and correctly but, the question inmy mind is what would be the criteria that would make a slide merely adequate or truely outstanding? PLease help thank you -- Louise Renton Bone Research Unit University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg South Africa +27 11 717 2298 (tel fax) 073 5574456 (emergencies only) There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls. George Carlin No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced. ___ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet -- Louise Renton Bone Research Unit University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg South Africa +27 11 717 2298 (tel fax) 073 5574456 (emergencies only) There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls. George Carlin No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced. ___ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
Re: [Histonet] QC on stained slides
Since you are the only one there it might be useful for you and your work place to do proficiency testing. You can purchase one through CAP. The one that would measure the quality of your sections and stains is called HistoQIP. I don't have the link handy but I am sure you could find it on the CAP web site. Kim Donadio Pathology Supervisor Baptist Hospital 1000 W Moreno St. Pensacola FL 32501 Phone (850) 469-7718 Fax (850) 434-4996 louise renton louise.ren...@gmail.com Sent by: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu 08/03/2010 02:25 AM To WILLIAM DESALVO wdesalvo@hotmail.com cc Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu Subject Re: [Histonet] QC on stained slides Thank you for your very helpful suggestionsThe situation here is a little weird as I am the only one doing the sectioning in this unit (research unit), and mostly i look at my own slides to do histomorphometry...so I have to grade myself??!!! Oh well, we do the best we can best regards On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:05 PM, WILLIAM DESALVO wdesalvo@hotmail.comwrote: Attached is a copy of the QA sheet that I provided at one of my NSH presentations. Review and use as needed. I believe your question of what makes a slide adequate or superior may be the wrong question. As long as you have a subjective review with a wide and varied specification, it will be extremely difficult to set a scoring process that will provide the desired feed back. I suggest you might want to approach in a different way and look at the number of defect or unacceptable products produced as compared to an agreed upon and high standard. use a Six Sigma tool to help you. I suggest you need an opportunities for improvement procedure and use the Defects per Million Opportunities (DPMO) tool. This will provide a process to evaluate the performance above and below standard in a simple and efficient manner. Your goal is never to deliver adequate work to your customer, the pathologist, but to always deliver the highest quality of work. You cannot improve the quality of work produced unless you know what is not meeting standard, not what is adequate or superior. Whether it is one person or multiple people working in the lab, there will always be variation in the product delivered because it is a manual process. You always want to reduce and narrow that variation to maintain the highest and consistent quality. But to narrow the variation you must have a standard and the standard must be agreed upon by the persons producing and the persons reviewing the work. I believe using a Six Sigma tool will provide you with the feedback you require and help you maintain the highest quality of slides delivered to the pathologists. Standardize your procedures and protocols, develop standards (highest quality standards) w/ your pathologists and then document, review, track and trend defects to improve the process. The data collected will give you specific information as to how you have performed to standard combined with the specific number of units produced by you (quality and quantity combined). This process will also allow you to compare multiple individuals working in the department and compare those individuals to each other. Everyone will be evaluated according to standards set for the work produced, plain, simple and effective. *William DeSalvo,* B.*S., HTL(ASCP)* * * Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 09:25:07 +0200 From: louise.ren...@gmail.com To: Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu CC: Subject: [Histonet] QC on stained slides Hi all As part of a self assessment programme conducted by my employer, and related to my performance review and salary adjustment, I need to determine the criteria of what makes a stained slide acceptable or unacceptable. I was wondering if anyone out there had a checklist that they would be willing to share, that i could perhaps adapt. I realise that the easiest would be to send slides out for external control, but in this case it is not feasible. What I put together is this: - Quality of decalcification, processing, infiltration - Quality of sections (no wrinkles, missing bits, scores etc) - Entire representation of tissue area - staining pattern as expected according to protocol - coverslipped without bubbles or other inclusions - labelled neatly and correctly but, the question inmy mind is what would be the criteria that would make a slide merely adequate or truely outstanding? PLease help thank you -- Louise Renton Bone Research Unit University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg South Africa +27 11 717 2298 (tel fax) 073 5574456 (emergencies only) There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls. George Carlin No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced. ___ Histonet
