Here’s a worrying development. The Centre for Medicare and Medicaid Services (in America) recently ruled that a BSN is equal to a bachelor’s degree in a biological science for high complexity testing personnel.
An excerpt from that ruling said ““Bachelor Degree in Nursing: A bachelor’s degree in nursing meets the requirement of having earned a bachelor’s degree in a biological science for high complexity testing personnel. The laboratory may show a PSV report verifying that a bachelor’s degree in nursing was earned, a diploma with the type of degree earned, or transcripts as evidence of meeting the education personnel requirement. An associate’s degree in nursing meets the requirement of having earned an associate’s degree in a biological science for moderate complexity testing personnel. The laboratory may show a PSV report verifying that an associate’s degree in nursing was earned, a diploma with the type of degree earned, or transcripts as evidence of meeting the education personnel requirement. “
Perhaps lab managers might see this as a way to recruit staff? But can a nurse who has trained to do a specific job *really* be expected to understand the intricacies and idiosyncrasies of the laboratory?
I think not… is this an honest mistake or an attempt at de-skilling?
The weekly BloodMed email came in this morning. This one had quite a bit of interest including lab data and films on cases of
- Spuriously high WBC counts and spurious lymphocytosis in a patient with sickle cell disease
- Compound heterozygosity for haemoglobin S and haemoglobin D-Punjab HPLC Chromatogram using Bio-Rad Variant II
I need to see more stuff like this !
Labels: bloodmed newsletter
My email from the Transfusion Evidence Library arrived in my inbox this morning. Far too much for me to read; none of which seemed particularly relevant at first sight.
In fact I had over seven thousand recommended articles.
I’ve now logged in and unticked all the possible things in which I might be interested, and only ticked a few topics of immediate relevance to me.
Let’s see how the next one looks…
This photo appeared on one of the Facebook groups to which I subscribe.
It is clearly an acute leukaemia of sorts. Possible/probably M3. But the comments on the Facebook page were fascinating with references to “butterfly cells” and “buttock cells”.
I’ve never heard of those particular terms before…
Labels: on-line resource
The NEQAS blood film morphology report 1606 BF came through today;
- 1606 BF1 was a case of MDS/MPN in transformation with target cells were due to chronic liver disease and the patient was also a transfusion dependant sickle cell-beta 0 thalassaemia patient
- BF2 was a case of G6PD deficient in haemolytic crisis.
Well, I’m happy I spotted the salient features. However as for a diagnosis… those cases are rather obscure. Did *anyone* come up with that particular combination of the highly unlikely given the very limited information we are given?
Labels: NEQAS morphology
I got an email entitled “Transfusion News” today. It came from e -firstname.lastname@example.org. I don’t remember signing up with them, but I am grateful for their email. It was rather interesting; it had articles on how well red cells survive storage, falling HIV rates in donor populations…
I wonder if any other emails like this will come along…
Labels: wiley e-newsletter
I subscribe to several Facebook groups related to pathology and laboratory medicine. This link appeared on one of them today.
When you go to the doctor most of the time your doctor might have ordered laboratory tests. Blood might have been drawn, urine might have been collected, sputum might have been collected, body fluids might have been drawn, and throat swabs might have been collected.
§ Have you ever been curious on what is done with those samples?
§ Do you know who run those samples?
This looks all very well, but it then goes on in the most basic of terms. All very well for the general public but why does anyone feel that the sort of person who subscribes to a dedicated pathology and laboratory medicine newsgroup would want to waste their time on something so trivial?
Not all CPD is constructive…
The UKAS e-newsletter arrived today. All sorts of information… however none of it was especially riveting
- 1129-CIS 11 - Edition 1 - September 2016.pdf
- 1130-CIS 12 - Edition 1 - September 2016.pdf
- 1131-CIS 10 - Edition 1 - September 2016.pdf
- 1132-NHSS 2A 9001_2015 - Issue 1 October 2016.pdf
- 1133-NHSS 12C 9001_2008 - Issue 12 October 2016.pdf
- 1134-NHSS 12C 9001_2015 - Issue 1 October 2016.pdf
- 1135-NHSS 13 9001_2008 - Issue 5 September 2016.pdf
- 1136-NHSS 13 9001_2015 - Issue 1 September 2016.pdf
- 1137-NHSS 17_17B 9001_2008 - Issue 4 September 2016.pdf
- 1138-TPS 66 - Edition 1 - September 2016 - Draft for consultation.pdf
- 1139-TPS 66 - Edition 1 - September 2016 - Consultation comments.docx
- 1140-2016.09 Printable Publications List.pdf
- 1141-2016.09 Printable Publications List(2).pdf
- 1142-Edition 207 Publications - changes since the previous edition - September 2016.pdf
- 1143-Edition 207 Publications - changes since the previous edition - September 2016(2).pdf
- 1144-2016.09 Printable Publications List.pdf
I must admit I glossed over a lot of it. But this is the sort of information that is useful to know that it exists; I know where I can find it if I need it.
Labels: UKAS Newsletter
The HCPC e-newsletter appeared in my inbox this morning. There was all sorts on news including:
· Focus on proposed changes to the standards of education and training and supporting guidance
· Registration renewal and CPD
· CPD audit report 2013–15 published
· Recruitment – paramedics and practitioner psychologists wanted for partner roles
· Employer survey – Have your say
· Come meet HCPC representatives
· Policy update
· Revised guidance for registrants – What happens if a concern is raised about me?
I must admit I rather glossed over the first section; there are seemingly always proposals for change.
The renewal and CPD audit sections interested me. I was intrigued to see that 80% of registrants were doing acceptable CPD; I often worry if what I am doing is good enough. I was also intrigued to learn the HCPC had a You-Tube channel.
I must admit that after learning that, the rest paled into insignificance. I’ve subscribed to the channel.
This is the way forward for CPD !!
Labels: HPC Newsletter