Manager mad RN followed policy and procedure! - page 2
There is a manager who wanted an RN to overlook policy and procedure, and got mad when other RN's voiced their opposition to this request. Who is wrong here, the manager or staff RN's. Situation was pt on floor gi bleed in need... Read More
- 2Nov 3, '11 by netglowUnfortunately, if a NM ever told me to do something I knew was not necessary and legally problematic for me, and then also said to me, "I'll take the heat for it" I probably wouldn't do it.
Sucks that you cannot trust people who have given you their word. Too many today don't know what means, and never intend to abide by the promise they've made. I mean unless I had many, many years professional working experience with the guy.
- 1Nov 3, '11 by TrafalgarRNDid you say you guys tube blood through the pneumatic system? Are there no checks between the blood bank tech and the person picking up the blood? As to who was right; i would say whoever was following the written policy and procedure. As for tubing the blood ; i have never heard about such a system and as part of a Quality council i would be against that...blood needs hand over from one human to another.
- 2Nov 3, '11 by maelstrom143The nurses who voiced an objection to tubing the blood unsecured were correct and the mgr wanting to overlook protocol would be the one in hot water if push comes to shove. Neither the nurse following protocol nor those supporting her should have been called to account for doing the right thing. It is not personal, it is just the right thing and the manager should know this, otherwise why did he/she become manager?
We use tube systems and have a lock whereby we must unlock the system when it alerts us to the arrival of blood. If it has to be taken elsewhere after its arrival on the floor, the blood would have to be manually taken and handed off or hung as needed.
No one can practice under another nurse's license and saying, "I will take the heat for it" will not cover the nurse if an issue arises.
Your manager was wrong.
- 3Nov 3, '11 by nrsnicWhen I was a phlebotomist I recall refusing to give blood to a room full of nurses, two ER docs, and the ICU charge. The reason was that the patient's blood ID band had been cut off, as well as his ACTUAL ID band, and had been tossed onto the counter amongst a messy pile of paperwork. It didn't matter that half the people there "absolutely knew" that the person in bed was, in fact, the right person...it is an absolute no-no to give blood to someone without ID bands. Especially since this person had just been transferred from OR.
Whew, just thinking about it gives me hives. The two doctors and the charge nurse were in my face screaming! Luckily my blood bank manager overheard that. Not only did my manager back me up, I was told some time later that I absolutely did the right thing by the nurse manager for ICU. It wasn't my fault that there was an oversight, but it was my duty to make sure that we got back on the policy/procedure track. The patient didn't suffer for it. We can give uncrossmatched blood in an emergency, which is what they did. WHILE the docs and charge were yelling at me, I calmly redrew the patient so he could have blood crossmatched again.
I won't say that I have never broken a policy or procedure, but blood products and all the procedures surrounding it are too important and scary to screw up.
- 0Nov 3, '11 by psu_213, BSN, RNWe get our blood 'tubed' to us (in the ED) from the blood bank. Each unit has the unit number and the blood type on a sticker on the bag of blood. Attached to the bag is a paper that has the pt name, the unit number, MRN, DOB, blood type, etc. I don't know the procedure if we receive a unit of blood that needs to be transported elsewhere (for instance, a unit of blood that was received on a pt that has since be transported to the floor). As for the OP, I have no idea why the NM did not want to follow the written procedure.
- 0Nov 4, '11 by Rob72Oh, let's see, we have a JCAHO violation, and a violation of practices recommended/mandated by the AABB.
http://www.aabb.org/Pages/Homepage.aspx Something about the Six Rs of Administration, I believe...hmmmm
"Never attribute to evil what may readily be explained by average stupidity."
- 3Nov 4, '11 by Penguin67OK, I have read the issue and all of the responses. I am left asking, "Why would you ever put a unit of blood into a tube system?" Everywhere that I ever worked, blood was never to be tubed, as it could potentially break and contaminate the entire tube system. I understand that your tube system is new, and perhaps this should ba policy where you work. Just my two cents here.
- 1Nov 4, '11 by ChristineNEverywhere I have worked blood has been sent to the floor through the tube system. Generally the blood is in a plastic bag as well as a padded tube to decrease the chance of explosion (and I've never heard/seen a unit explode). The unit is checked by the blood bank and time stamped and sent to the floor for 2 RN's to check.
My issue with the OP's story is why was the blood sent to the floor if the nurse wasn't ready for it? If there was another unit still infusing then she was not ready for her 2nd unit. At my hospital the policy is that blood is only good at room temperature for 30 min, so the blood bank does not tube blood until the RN says she is ready. In this situation, I would have told the blood bank to send it to the OR when they were ready for it.
- 2Nov 4, '11 by psu_213, BSN, RNQuote from Penguin67What about any blood samples/blood cxs. (stool samples?) If they broke they would contaminate the system. I think the real argument in this regard is that if something happened to the tube system, what if a unit of blood was in transit and got stuck along its journey when the system broke for some other reason?OK, I have read the issue and all of the responses. I am left asking, "Why would you ever put a unit of blood into a tube system?" Everywhere that I ever worked, blood was never to be tubed, as it could potentially break and contaminate the entire tube system. I understand that your tube system is new, and perhaps this should ba policy where you work. Just my two cents here.
- 0Nov 8, '11 by Rob72Quote from psu_213As with most "cost containment" policies, a statistician crunched the numbers, and advised Legal that it was a statistically valid choice. Don't need all those $$ phlebs, techs, or aides, if you can have a tube system. IIRC, it "saves" something like 5-10 FTEs/annum, on average.What about any blood samples/blood cxs. (stool samples?) If they broke they would contaminate the system. I think the real argument in this regard is that if something happened to the tube system, what if a unit of blood was in transit and got stuck along its journey when the system broke for some other reason?
If you suspect you blood is taking a tad too long, call, or have someone else call the BB. Its then old fashioned leg work.