From the desk of
Ed Sharpless, VP of Product Development
Email us with your comments:
Ed Sharpless, VP of Product Development, eds@williamlabs.com
March 2012
Cooler Validation Survey Results
The Cooler Validation Survey conducted in late January drew participation from over 70 blood banking professionals. You are receiving this report because you were kind enough to participate, and asked to be informed of our results. You and your peers were generous and forthcoming with your ideas, concerns and procedures. For that, we are genuinely grateful.
Although we didn’t ask the specific question, it appears from the survey responses that we had participation from a wide range of facilities. That said, the single strongest “take away” message from the survey is that there is significant variation in validation procedures, including the equipment used as “transport coolers,” as well as the assorted devices/items used to perform validation. The validation protocols themselves appear to be unique to each organization, with an expressed need for clear guidance and more commonality.
Here is a “Quick Look” at the survey results. The actual survey response data is presented in the pages that follow. Because we did not design the survey with statistical controls, it’s not a strict scientific study, but it has certainly proved to be both fascinating and insightful!
Quick Look: Cooler Validation Survey Results |
|---|
88% validate with 1-2 units (minimum number), but the maximum number varies greatly. |
A majority use and Igloo®-style cooler of variable sizes. |
Frozen cold packs are the most common packing choice. |
Thermometers are twice as common as temperature recorders for measuring temperature. |
A majority place the probe/thermometer between the bags, not in the bags. |
A resounding 91% use cooler validation protocols/procedures from their hospital/blood bank. |
Many respondents expressed frustration, concern and bewilderment at the time-consuming procedure, as well as at the lack of validation standards. |
Complete Survey Report (click here)
In our quest to simplify and demystify cooler validation, this survey has been enlightening and highly valuable. We are making significant progress on Validation Kit development, and the information that you provided in this survey has been crucial to developing a product offering, inclusive of suggested procedures and equipment, that can help alleviate some of the frustrations and concerns we learned about via the survey.
As always, we thank our survey participants for partnering with us to ensure that we help “deliver the best” - in our common challenge to ensure safe blood product management.
Ed Sharpless
Vice President Product Development
ARCHIVES
January 2012
Transport and Storage Cooler Validation
We are several weeks into our Cooler Validation Kit trials, and one thing is for certain. We're learning a lot! And we want to learn more - and share it with you>>
November 2011
Update from AABB 2011: Transport and Storage Coolers used in Blood Banks
We learned so much from blood bankers, medical technologists and other colleagues in the field. In particular, we heard about a variety of cooler validation protocols, the challenges and flaws in current procedures..... Here's what we learned>>
September 2011
Transport Cooler Validation and Blood Product Temperatures
Given the discussion around this topic at AABB2010, we asked blood bankers about their cooler validation practices and equipment, checked blogs, and generally surveyed how blood bank coolers were being validated. Here's what we learned>>
September 2010
Combining Blood Banks and Tissue Banks: Are they as similar as they seem?
Coming from the William Labs’ blood management perspective and expertise, we have taken particular interest in conversations that blood management and tissue management have a lot in common. Read more >>
June 2010
Temperature Sensitive Labels for RBCs
Article from the American Journal of Pathology Compares Performance
This article entitled ‘Temperature-Sensitive Labels for Containers of RBCs’, is a study of the ‘suitability of temperature-sensitive labels fixed to the exterior surface of blood containers for monitoring the temperature of blood components outside of the temperature-monitored refrigeration’. The authors evaluated Safe-T-Vue, Hemo Temp II, and Spot Check. Figure II is an insightful display of the variation of temperatures across blood bags as they warm, using 5 different starting temperatures, the lowest being 3.3 and the highest 5.0. The display underscores the importance of maintaining blood refrigerators as cold as possible. I believe you will find the paper is filled with useful information. Learn more.....
February 2010
Redefining Transport & Storage Temperatures
Summary from "Ask the Standards Committee" at AABB 2009
To quote the Moderator, this was a “familiar topic.” At Session 9417-TC of the 2009 AABB, "Ask the Standards Committee," the Standards Committee leadership addressed recent changes in the 26th Edition Standards for Blood Banks and Transfusion Services, as well as questions submitted to the committee. more...
October 2009
Clarification Offered for Storage vs. Transport of Blood Components in Monitored Coolers
From October 2005 AABB Annual Meeting "Ask the FDA" Session
In response to several recent inquiries regarding the proper temperature for blood components during cooler storage or transportation, the association has re-released information from an "Ask the FDA" session at the October 2005 AABB Annual Meeting. more...
September 2009
Update: Storage vs. Transport of Blood Components
Some things just never change. Take, for example, this question from the "Ask the FDA" session at the October 2008 AABB Annual Meeting in Montreal. Today, another year later, we find our blood banking colleagues still challenged with defining the exact differences between transport and temporary storage. more...
