The January 2013 issue of MLO includes two letters responding to Roy Midyett's article on “Empty QC” published in the November 2012 issue. Another letter didn't arrive in time to be included in the January issue–so I present it to you here. The writer is George F. Klipfel II, CLS, MT(ASCP), of Eisenhower Medical Center in Rancho Mirage, California.
As a CLS with over 30 years experience, overseeing QC for the Chemistry and Endo/Pharm departments in a 400-bed hospital for the past 10 years or so, I'm in total agreement with Roy Midyett regarding “empty QC.” I'd even go a step further and suggest that there is a much too cozy relationship between the quality control manufacturers and the inspecting agencies. It's in the financial interest of both to weigh us down with ever-increasing numbers of QC products that have minimal, if any, clinical utility. Like Mr. Midyett, I can see no purpose in QC products that are supposed to control manual cell counts. If our latest healthcare laws are supposed to be primarily concerned with patient outcomes, certainly the regulations of inspecting agencies should be geared towards patient outcomes as well.
Interesting point of view. I'd be glad to post any responses from readers.
