
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
P06-Understanding the Quality of your Electron Microscopy Provider in this Era of Outsourcing of Services- Tracey de Haro MSc, FIBMS, UK NEQAS CPT TEM Scheme Coordinator Specialist Scientific Lead for Electron Microscopy University Hospitals Of Leicester NHS Trust, UK
Background
Whether UK or globally, when pathology departments are looking for a supplier of diagnostic EM services, the only
The following relevant issues should be considered alongside cost and speed;
Can the EM unit produce good quality sections and images that maximizes the chances of observing relevant pathologies?
Questions to Ask Your EM Provider
Summary
Access to EM services remains vital across the globe, but in the UK is increasingly being outsourced to units remote from the originating trust. In this case, the pathologist is reliant on the images and ultrastructural report being accurate to inform diagnosis.
P15-Understanding the Quality of your Electron Microscopy Provider in this Era of Outsourcing of Services: How does a Technical EQA Scheme Add Value? -Tracey de Haro MSc, FIBMS, UK NEQAS CPT TEM Scheme Coordinator Specialist Scientific Lead for Electron Microscopy University Hospitals Of Leicester NHS Trust, UK
Background
EQY Scheme Organization
TEM scheme Participants are asked to submit 4 digital images from each of 2 contrasted TEM cases. There are 6 EQA assessment runs per year. Specific tissue types for each case are requested for each assessment run. Renal cases are requested for each run as case 1 and muscle or nerve are requested in rotation for case 2. However alternative tissue types can be submitted for either case if participants do not
Details of technical fixation, processing and imaging for each case are required to be submitted as part of Data Entry. This allows generation of ‘best method’ reports for high achieving EQA scores to be issued to Participants. Each image is anonymously assessed against the defined assessment criteria by a pair of expert peer assessors. Each assessor will award a score out of 5 giving a total score for each image out of 10.
Participants receive the following for each run;
• EM Individualized report detailing the scores awarded for each image, along with information about where marks were lost and why
Summary
5
99 ratings
P06-Understanding the Quality of your Electron Microscopy Provider in this Era of Outsourcing of Services- Tracey de Haro MSc, FIBMS, UK NEQAS CPT TEM Scheme Coordinator Specialist Scientific Lead for Electron Microscopy University Hospitals Of Leicester NHS Trust, UK
Background
Whether UK or globally, when pathology departments are looking for a supplier of diagnostic EM services, the only
The following relevant issues should be considered alongside cost and speed;
Can the EM unit produce good quality sections and images that maximizes the chances of observing relevant pathologies?
Questions to Ask Your EM Provider
Summary
Access to EM services remains vital across the globe, but in the UK is increasingly being outsourced to units remote from the originating trust. In this case, the pathologist is reliant on the images and ultrastructural report being accurate to inform diagnosis.
P15-Understanding the Quality of your Electron Microscopy Provider in this Era of Outsourcing of Services: How does a Technical EQA Scheme Add Value? -Tracey de Haro MSc, FIBMS, UK NEQAS CPT TEM Scheme Coordinator Specialist Scientific Lead for Electron Microscopy University Hospitals Of Leicester NHS Trust, UK
Background
EQY Scheme Organization
TEM scheme Participants are asked to submit 4 digital images from each of 2 contrasted TEM cases. There are 6 EQA assessment runs per year. Specific tissue types for each case are requested for each assessment run. Renal cases are requested for each run as case 1 and muscle or nerve are requested in rotation for case 2. However alternative tissue types can be submitted for either case if participants do not
Details of technical fixation, processing and imaging for each case are required to be submitted as part of Data Entry. This allows generation of ‘best method’ reports for high achieving EQA scores to be issued to Participants. Each image is anonymously assessed against the defined assessment criteria by a pair of expert peer assessors. Each assessor will award a score out of 5 giving a total score for each image out of 10.
Participants receive the following for each run;
• EM Individualized report detailing the scores awarded for each image, along with information about where marks were lost and why
Summary