SBAR for Change in CLIA Rules
24 followers
5 Likes
+ 2 more
I wrote a SBAR to initiate conversation with my lab leadership team and the hospital management team. Would love to hear any feedback from the.
Please feel free to copy it for your needs.
Please feel free to copy it for your needs.
15 Replies
Reply
Subgroup Membership is required to post Replies
Join POCT Listserv now
Suggested Posts
Topic | Replies | Likes | Views | Participants | Last Reply |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
EPOC scanner issue post software update | 6 | 0 | 282 | ||
PFA-100 | 0 | 0 | 110 | ||
HMS+ vs. iSTAT Method Comparison | 2 | 2 | 374 |
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/12/28/2023-28170/clinical-laboratory-improvement-amendments-of-1988-clia-fees-histocompatibility-personnel-and
As far as I understand it, the grandfather clause only protects the position the person is in, not the person themselves. Should they leave their role and a new person come in, the new person is not covered under the grandfather clause.
My hospital system and I am sure many others, is not one that changes easily or quickly so starting these conversations now is a must, rather than dealing with the actual fire drill that will occur if we don't.
I'm not seeing (or possibly understanding) the semester hour requirements in this final rule. What is the adequate number of biology and chemistry courses for a nursing degree to qualify? We have so much movement in positions, that the grandfathering loophole is not going to be very helpful for me!
We define the specific disease states / conditions (as listed by the mfr limitations) in our policy that would require lab-drawn glucoses to address this issue.
Donna- you read my mind. I understand the pain points that will happen with this change but I wholeheartedly support it. POC has transformed into a true department of the laboratory, and it should come with complete quality oversight and lab support. My personal opinion is that lab gave away it's power with POC a long time ago when it didn't want anything to do with it. Sometimes for good reason. But the POC technology today is different and our POC programs are strong. Let's lobby for regulatory changes that support testing instead of hold it back with PROPER laboratory POC oversight. Thank you for adding this to the discussion! Mary
Here is the response, which is complicated and sends you in a couple different places. Someone want to check my work on this? :)
Technical consultant qualifications: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2023-28170/p-amd-29
Scroll down to here: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2023-28170/p-823
Which reads:
(B) Meet § 493.1405(b)(5)(i)(B); and
493.1405 starts here: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2023-28170/p-amd-26, which are the Lab Director qualifications for a Moderate Complexity Testing Lab but when you read through and get to 493.1405(b)(5)(i)(B) here: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2023-28170/p-801, it reads:
(B) At least 120 semester hours, or equivalent, from an accredited institution that, at a minimum, includes either—
My hospital system is a bit behind on their understanding of the Accu-chek issues and how to approach it. I am hoping to use these CLIA changes as leverage to move away from Roche and the complicated oversight that using them in a hospital system brings, especialy since the majority of the hospitals in our system use the Nova. Fingers crossed for hopeful silver linings.