Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

Let me be honest and straightforward: this was not my favorite model when I first learned about it. Until, that is, I went through the certification to become a trainer and I fell head over heels in love, despite it being more complicated and intricate than the other models used and discussed in the Leadership Institute. The MBTI provides a deep understanding of your personality traits, natural skills, and tendencies while highlighting skills you have learned along the way. As an added bonus, this understanding isn’t tied to any life role (work, parent, child, friend, etc.). I, for instance, have a slight preference for extraversion with a lot of introversion tendencies. However, I usually come across as highly extraverted, as I learned to act more extraverted because my sister was very shy growing up and I wanted to balance it out.

The MBTI focuses on your innate personality preference, organized into four dichotomies:

  • Extraversion vs. Introversion (E –I)
  • Sensing vs. Intuition (S – N)
  • Thinking vs. Feeling (T – F)
  • Judging vs. Perceiving (J – P)

Your preferences in each category, when combined, are your type. For example, if I had a preference for Introversion (I), Sensing (S), Feeling (F), and Perceiving (P), my type would be ISFP. This type gives me insights into how I interact with others, process information, come to conclusions, and approach the outside world. Understanding this will allow me to know my strengths and weaknesses as well as those of others. As a leader, applying that knowledge effectively in different situations and with different people is essential.

 

lotte-small

-Lotte Mulder earned her Master’s of Education from the Harvard Graduate School of Education in 2013, where she focused on Leadership and Group Development. She’s currently toward a PhD in Organizational Leadership. At ASCP, Lotte designs and facilitates the ASCP Leadership Institute, an online leadership certificate program. She has also built ASCP’s first patient ambassador program, called Patient Champions, which leverages patient stories as they relate to the value of the lab.

 

Yin and Yang

Who would have thought that our personality is made of contradicting elements?

I truly enjoyed the MBTI course, it was an eye opener of who I am and a trip inwards. Knowing who we really are, our talents, comfort zones and blind spots will help us become better leaders.

So now I know and after all these years (on a personal or professional level) that I am an “ENFP,” these four letters mean that I tend to be extraverted, intuitive, feeling and perceiving. I do agree with the assessment as it reflects who I am and decided after taking the course to put my Middle Eastern Ego aside and not challenge the blind spots.

ENFPs see new possibilities in people, situations, tasks and projects at hand. We tend to have high energy and flexibility. In my line of work, being the Chief Quality Officer at MedLabs Consultancy Group in Amman-Jordan, I find these personal traits very critical to our success as a company to ensure the highest compliance in implementing quality standards throughout our network of laboratories spanning four countries and exceeding 50 in total. Being a people’s person is a great asset in order to touch the hearts, minds and souls of our staff to sustain these quality standards, being 150% convinced rather than simply following the rules. We are trying to “personalize” Quality and Safety, this can only be accomplished through connecting with each staff member and it requires inspiration, a trait that is “built in” ENFPs.

Looking at the blind spots, I find that we tend to get overexcited about projects, juggling many at the same time and loosing track of priorities in the hope of making a difference. Guilty as charged.

I am learning to take one project at a time, see it through completion and start the next one in the pipeline, this gave me and my colleagues a breather and time to reflect if the road that we are taking is indeed the correct one.

So now I am asking myself, what if I did not have the great opportunity to be part of the ASCP Leadership Program and I have missed out on MBTI? What if I did not realize that I am an ENFP? What if I could not appreciate the blind spots?

The simple answer is: I will be a classical leader in it for the title, with little contributions and not much of a positive effect on those who are around me. My job will be stale, with no spirit and dull, so I guess Yin and Yang actually works.

 

Soudi

-Nael M. Soudi holds a bachelor degree in Microbiology from State University of New York at Plattsburgh (USA). He completed both his Master Degree in Molecular Biology and a postgraduate program in Cytotechnology at Johns Hopkins University (USA). Mr. Soudi is a certified Practitioner in Health Care Quality (CPHQ) and a certified consultant and inspector with the Healthcare Accreditation Council. He is also certified by the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) and the American Society of Clinical Pathologists (ASCP) – Cytology. Mr. Soudi is fully licensed by the American Society of Clinical Pathologists and the College of American Pathologist (CAP) as a Certified Inspector. He is a frequent presenter at regional and international conferences discussing topics in Cytology, leadership, accreditation and healthcare quality. 

Your Reaction to Safety

The toddler’s father let her hand go so he could pay for their dinner at the busy airport. The little girl quickly wandered away and suddenly found herself at the top of a long escalator that was going down. No one was watching.

Mrs. Anders was walking home as she did every day from the neighborhood pool. She was very hard of hearing, but she was as friendly as she could be. As she waved to you while crossing the street, you see the car speeding toward her at too fast a pace.

You may have encountered a situation similar to one of these, or you may have seen something like it in a suspenseful movie or television program. The scenario is something that can create a reaction in you, a feeling of sudden dread, and the urge to take quick action. That’s a good response, and it could save someone from a serious incident.

But is your reaction the same in the lab where you work?

Lisa processed some CSF samples at the front desk that were delivered from another lab. She later received a call from the sending lab alerting her that the patient was positive for CJD, a prion disease, and the specimens were sent in error. When she went to clean up the processing area and tell the other staff, Lisa saw her co-worker leaning on the counter and using the computer with no PPE.

In the morning, Ken dropped a glass bottle of hydrochloric acid on the lab floor, and it shattered and spilled. He went to get the spill clean-up kit, but before he returned, the pathologist walked into the department wearing open-toed shoes.

Now let’s try something a bit subtler:

Robert is working in the chemistry department and he uncaps the next batch of tubes to be analyzed behind the safety shield on the counter. He places the tubes in the rack and carries the rack over to the analyzer. He’s not wearing any face protection.

Sheila was the supervisor in hematology, and she was walking through the department as Dwayne was on the phone with a service representative about the broken analyzer. The rep asked to speak to Sheila. Dwayne hands her the phone with his gloved hands, Sheila is wearing no PPE.

As a lab safety professional, one of my goals is to help lab staff have that same urgent gut reaction- that feeling that something is wrong and needs immediate correction- in all of those lab scenarios above, particularly the subtle ones. In each of those moments, the risk of danger or infection is very high and needs to be mitigated. All too often, however, these events occur in labs and no one reacts. That’s a safety culture problem.

There are many possible reasons for that typical lack of response. People are busy, the unsafe practices are common, or safety is simply not a priority. Lab injuries and exposures continue to occur across the nation, so the issues need to be addressed, and there are ways to do that successfully.

One method I use in safety training (that I’ve written about before) is the development of “Safety Eyes.” I call that the latent super-power that everyone possesses, but it needs to be taught and honed. When you work in a particular environment every day, it can become difficult to see the safety problems without training and practice. Take pictures of unsafe lab practices or problems and show them to staff. Have them identify the issue. As they practice, they will begin to see issues more often. Take practice safety walks with staff and look for issues. These actions will help everyone’s “Safety Eyes” to develop and become powerful tools in the department.

Of course, just seeing the issue is not enough. The second important piece here is teaching staff to respond when they do spot a problem. That can take some training and empowerment that may be new ideas for many. Teach staff to coach their peers for safety. This behavior will show others that safety is a priority, and over time more and more staff will begin to follow suit.

To produce the reaction you want in your laboratory—the issue is noticed, there is a sudden sense of dread or a gut reaction, and then there is a correction made—takes consistency. The lab safety leader will need to provide education about the regulations. Next, develop the “Safety Eyes” of the staff through pictures and safety walks. Finally, teach them to respond to the problems. As people, we are aware of the immediate danger when we see a toddler at the top of the stairs. The possibility of harm is clear to us. If you can produce that clarity for your staff with lab safety issues, you can get those reactions that can only improve your safety culture, and you can drastically reduce those injuries and exposures.

 

Scungio 1

Dan Scungio, MT(ASCP), SLS, CQA (ASQ) has over 25 years experience as a certified medical technologist. Today he is the Laboratory Safety Officer for Sentara Healthcare, a system of seven hospitals and over 20 laboratories and draw sites in the Tidewater area of Virginia. He is also known as Dan the Lab Safety Man, a lab safety consultant, educator, and trainer.

Leadership is WEadership

Leadership is all about the other person; it is about adapting your own behavior and communications styles to meet the needs of the people you are leading. However, in order to be able to adapt your own behavior, you first need to learn about yourself.  Discovering your natural leadership styles, communication and delegation preferences, views about conflict, and your strengths and weaknesses will improve your leadership abilities. This learning requires a deep-dive analysis through one (or preferably all) of these methods:

  • Self-reflection
  • Feedback from others
  • Coaching
  • Self-assessments

Personally I have always been drawn to constructive feedback so I can discover areas for growth. It’s not always pleasant to hear, but we all have blind spots, and feedback is a crucial first step in personal and professional development. In the last few years I have added another layer of self-discovery: self-assessments. In my experience, self-assessments give you 1) a sense that you are not alone; that your thoughts, behaviors, the ways in which you process information are not different than everyone else but that there are people who behave, think, and process in similar ways, 2) a deeper sense of understanding where your behavior or communication preferences come from, and 3) a practical understanding of people who act differently than you and how to approach them more effectively. In other words, self-assessments are a way to acknowledge one’s own behavior and that of others. So much of leadership is about acknowledging other people through adapting your own behavior.

When I got hired to create a Leadership Institute for ASCP members, I used self-assessments as the cornerstone of our curriculum. I want our members to have access to the same level of awareness and development that I have enjoyed throughout the years. Learning about your motivators and blind sides is crucial before you can truly turn leadership into WEadership.

 

lotte-small

-Lotte Mulder earned her Master’s of Education from the Harvard Graduate School of Education in 2013, where she focused on Leadership and Group Development. At ASCP, Lotte designs and facilitates the ASCP Leadership Institute, an online leadership certificate program. She has also built ASCP’s first patient ambassador program, called Patient Champions, which leverages patient stories as they relate to the value of the lab.

Phlebotomists and PPE: How Do You Decide?

When it comes to making a decision about Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in the laboratory, OSHA is pretty clear about how to go about making the selection. The use of risk assessments and task assessments is required by OSHA’s Bloodborne Pathogens standard, and these can be essential tools in making decisions regarding safety throughout the laboratory. The decision-making tools and processes can be applied to the patient collection area as well. You might think selecting PPE for phlebotomists would be straightforward, but in some cases, it is not.

Deciding on gloves for phlebotomists is easy. The Bloodborne Pathogens standard states, “Gloves shall be worn when it can be reasonably anticipated that the employee may have hand contact with blood … (and) when performing vascular access procedures.” (The one exception here is when collecting blood at a volunteer donor center, although gloves may be worn there as well.) So, if you have phlebotomists on your team, whether they collect blood on the patient units, at client sites, or in the lab, they all need to be wearing gloves, and it is required that they change those gloves after each patient contact. The gloves should be constructed of latex, nitryl, or another material that prevents the passage blood or body fluids (vinyl gloves should not be used).

Some of the decisions about the use of lab coats and phlebotomists are, unfortunately, more complicated. This first part of this conversation is easy. The BBP standard requires lab coats “in occupational exposure situations.” That means that if phlebotomists perform any work in the lab- if they process blood, spin it down, pour it off, etc. – they are in such an exposure situation and need a lab coat (and face protection if they handle open specimens or chemicals).

The second part is a bit more troublesome. Do phlebotomists need to wear lab coats when collecting blood from patients? According to OSHA, the answer is a clear “no.” A 2007 OSHA letter of interpretation states, “ Laboratory coats… are not typically needed as personal protective equipment (PPE) during routine venipuncture.” The letter does also go on to say that employers should perform risk assessments for any potential exposure situation in order to make decisions about lab coat use.

I do not favor the use of lab coats for phlebotomists, and I have my reasons. In my years of collecting specimens, I never obtained a splash of blood above my wrist, and I believe the risk of such a splash is minimal. As a Lab Safety Officer, I also know the use of a lab coat for phlebotomists creates several issues. If a lab coat is worn as PPE, should the same coat be worn from patient to patient? That would never happen with gloves, so if the lab coat is for protection against blood spatter, should that used and potentially contaminated protection be re-used? If a phlebotomist uses a lab coat while processing specimens in the lab, should that same lab coat be used with patients? No, OSHA says PPE used in the lab should never be worn outside the lab. Will phlebotomists change their lab coats? That is not convenient for them, and it opens the door to regulation violations and potential patient harm.

When having conversations about this topic, I have heard the argument that clothes or scrubs are worn from patient to patient if lab coats are not used. What’s the difference between that and wearing the same lab coat? The difference is that clothes and scrubs are not PPE. They are not designed to offer protection against splashes. Once you use an item as PPE, the OSHA regulations that cover the employee and how it should be viewed change.

On the other side of the coin, however, is a survey that was conducted in 2008 by DenLine Uniforms, Inc.[1] 180 phlebotomists across the country responded to questions about exposure and lab coat use. 64% of those surveyed regularly used semi-impermeable lab coats as PPE while collecting blood. 74% of respondents said they had encountered blood splashing beyond the hand area multiple times during the years they had been drawing blood. Given just this data, it seems clear that there is a high risk of blood exposure while performing venipuncture procedures, and that should mean that a lab coat should be used.

So how do you decide what to do with phlebotomists and lab coats in your lab or hospital? First, start with a risk assessment. Determine the risk of exposure above the wrist based on the collection equipment and procedures used at your location. If the risk is low, you should feel comfortable choosing not to provide lab coats for this process. If you find the risk of splash is high, implement the use of lab coats. Use caution, however, and consider the impact to patients of wearing what you consider to be contaminated PPE from patient to patient. As with all decisions about lab safety, think about the regulations, but if they don’t give you the answer you need, fall back to the choice that offers the best safe practice for your staff.

[1] https://www.denlineuniforms.com/assets/images/pdf/Blood_Draw_Exposure_Survey-October_2008.pdf

 

Scungio 1

Dan Scungio, MT(ASCP), SLS, CQA (ASQ) has over 25 years experience as a certified medical technologist. Today he is the Laboratory Safety Officer for Sentara Healthcare, a system of seven hospitals and over 20 laboratories and draw sites in the Tidewater area of Virginia. He is also known as Dan the Lab Safety Man, a lab safety consultant, educator, and trainer.

Business and Legal Considerations for Pathology and Laboratory Service Providers

The legal considerations when providing pathology and laboratory services can be daunting. However, help is at hand! ASCP Press recently released a Business/Legal handbook. Also, in this podcast, an attorney gives listeners a basic rundown of some of the legal intricacies involved in running a laboratory.

The ABCs of BSCs

Many labs have received notices this year that their Biological Safety Cabinet (BSC) certification company will no longer certify a certain type of BSC that those labs have had for years. NSF International (formerly the National Sanitation Foundation) is an organization that supplies product testing, inspection and certification. NSF is accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to develop American National Standards, and in 2010 an updated version of the NSF/ANSI 49 was published. This is better known as the Biosafety Cabinetry: Design, Construction, Performance, and Field Certification standard.

The names can be confusing, but the important message is the revisions to the standard eliminated the option of direct-connected Type A cabinets (which had been previously allowed). Also, an alarm requirement was added for canopy connected Type A cabinets. There was time allowed for sites with these types of BSCs to make necessary adjustments, and in 2016 field certification agencies have been told they can no longer certify BSCs which do not meet the updated standards.

That means that some labs that have not updated their BSCs or purchased new ones, they are left with uncertified (and therefore unusable) cabinets.

There are three main classes of BSCs. Class I offers the least amount of protection, and it pulls air in and over the work area. The air is then exhausted via a HEPA filter. Class II BSCs are the most commonly-used cabinets in clinical laboratories. They offer a maintained inward airflow, a HEPA-filtered unidirectional airflow within the work area, and a HEPA-filtered exhaust into the room or to the facility exhaust system. Class III BSCs (or glove boxes) are for use with high risk biological agents, and they are typically sealed and gas-tight enclosures.

The commonly-used class II cabinets come in a variety of designs or types:

  • A1 – 70% of the air recirculates through the supply HEPA filter, the other 30% of air goes through the exhaust HEPA filter.
  • A2 – 70% of the air is recirculated through the supply HEPA filter, the other 30% of air goes through the exhaust HEPA filter. The air intake is faster than in a type A1 cabinet.
  • B1 – 40% of the air is recirculated, 60% of air is exhausted.
  • B2 –   No air is recirculated within, it is all exhausted into the facility system.

Some older Class II Type A cabinets had the exhaust directly connected to the facility exhaust system. This is no longer permitted since hard connections need to meet specific regulated criteria and is not considered the safest type of connection. If connected to an exhaust system, the cabinets must use a canopy (thimble or air-gap) connection which has an opening to the room. Because there is always the potential for equipment failure (and a possibility of air contamination to the room via the opening), an alarm system must also now be in place to alert the user of this possible danger. In 2016, all BSC field service workers were notified not to certify Type A cabinets with a hard connection or with a non-alarmed canopy connection. If you received a memo and had an issue with certification this year, that’s why!

No matter what Class II type of BSC you are using, there are some basic safety guidelines every user should know in order to keep protected while working. If the blower is not kept on all the time, turn it on about ten minutes before use. This will stabilize the protective air flow in the cabinet.  Adjust the seat height so that the user’s face is above the front opening. Set all specimens and materials that are needed inside the work space, and separate the clean from the dirty. Do not set anything on the front grille.  Objects too close to the front, side, and rear air grilles can disturb airflow and compromise the specimen and the worker’s safety.

When working in a BSC, avoid frequent and fast motions. When moving arms in and out of BSC, move them slowly and perpendicular to the sash. This will allow less interference with the air flow. Be sure to limit traffic in the area when working- people walking behind a BSC in use will disturb the air flow such that air will pass out of the cabinet into the breathing zone of the user. In general, fume hoods and BSCs should never be located in high traffic areas.

Once work is completed inside the BSC, properly dispose of all waste material. Disinfect the cabinet surfaces using an extension apparatus to reach the back wall. Never put your head inside the BSC. Use a bleach solution for disinfection. If damage to the surface is a concern, wipe down the surface with water after using the bleach. Let the BSC run for at least 10 minutes before turning off.

It is important to remember that a Biological Safety Cabinet is an engineering control designed to protect the worker, but it only does so if used properly. Make sure all users are properly trained to use a BSC safely. Have them certified annually, and let certified professionals perform the required maintenance. If you received a memo this year, it may be time to purchase a newer BSC in order to maintain safe work practices in your lab. Ask your field service representatives for the best option for your laboratory.

 

Scungio 1

-Dan Scungio, MT(ASCP), SLS, CQA (ASQ) has over 25 years experience as a certified medical technologist. Today he is the Laboratory Safety Officer for Sentara Healthcare, a system of seven hospitals and over 20 laboratories and draw sites in the Tidewater area of Virginia. He is also known as Dan the Lab Safety Man, a lab safety consultant, educator, and trainer.

Facing CJD and Prion Diseases in the Lab

According to the National Institute of Health (NIH), Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is a rare, degenerative, fatal brain disorder that affects about one person in every one million people per year worldwide. In the United States there are about 300 cases per year. Some of us know the ailment better as “Mad Cow disease,” but that is only one form of this illness which is not caused by a virus or bacteria. CJD is a prion disease. A prion is a protein that exists in both a normal form, which is a harmless, and in an infectious form. The infectious form of the protein takes on a different folded shape, and once these abnormal proteins appear, they aggregate or clump together. Investigators think these prion aggregates may lead to the neuron loss and other brain damage seen in CJD. However, they do not know exactly how this damage occurs.

Since laboratory professionals may deal with specimens from possible CJD patients, we need to know how to properly handle them should such a situation arise. If the Operating Room calls your labs to process a brain biopsy specimen from a patient who was suspected of having a prion disease, would you know what to do? Can your lab do that? Should your lab do that?

Prions are dangerous, but CJD cannot be transmitted through the air or through touching or most other forms of casual contact. Prion transmission can occur, however, from contact with highly-infectious specimens. Brain tissue, eye tissue, and pituitary tissue are considered high-risk specimens, and contact with these should be avoided. When asked to handle a brain biopsy, medical staff and safety experts should work out a plan. For instance, a lab tech who is trained in Category A packaging could go to the OR, dress in fully protective PPE (including a body suit, gloves, and hood), and receive the specimen in the OR and package it there. The specimen is then ready for transport to the reference laboratory. If another department asks you to handle tissue samples from a suspected CJD patient, stop everything and escalate the issue immediately. Contact your medical director, your manager, or the safety officer and await further instructions.

There are other specimen types a lab might receive from a prion patient. Blood, serum, urine, feces, and sputum are considered no-risk specimens. Prions are not found in these types of specimens, and they may be handled and processed as usual.

The last category of specimens from prion patients is known as “low-risk.” These specimens include CSF, kidney, liver, spleen, lung, lymph nodes, placenta, and olfactory epithelium tissues. Of course the most common specimen a lab would see from this group is a spinal fluid, and labs do need to make sure they do not handle it as a normal specimen.

Lab staff should be notified when a specimen is going to be sent from a prion patient, particularly when a low-risk specimen like a CSF is on the way. Procedures should be in place, and it is recommended that such specimens have special labels on them to alert those of the potential risks.

There is no record of lab employees becoming infected with prions from handling low-risk specimens, but they must still be handled with care. All testing of low-risk specimens should be performed inside a Biological Safety Cabinet (BSC). Use disposable equipment as much as possible. For example, use disposable cups for stains or reagents where possible. Perform manual testing only; do not run low-risk specimens on automated analyzers as disinfection is not easily accomplished.

While using standard bleach solutions to disinfect surfaces is recommended after processing low-risk specimens, a lab spill of such a specimen is an entirely different matter, and this is why lab specimens should have special labeling. When a low-risk specimen spills, the area should be flooded with 2N Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) or undiluted sodium hypochlorite (bleach). Remember, never mix bleach with formaldehyde as it produces a dangerous gas, so if a pathology specimen is spilled, only use NaOH. Leave the solution on the spilled material for one hour, then rinse with water. Place the spill materials into a sharps container so that they will be incinerated. If a spill of a low-risk CJD or prion specimen occurs, contact a manager, a medical director, or the safety officer immediately.

Laboratory professionals handle infectious specimens every day which is why it is so important that we utilize Standard Precautions. Wear PPE when working in the lab and treat all specimens as if they were infectious. It’s the only way to prevent a lab-acquired infection. If you see a co-worker not wearing gloves or a lab coat and working at a lab counter or computer, use coaching to remind them that those surfaces are potentially contaminated with pathogens, and they can be deadly. We can protect ourselves from low-risk prion disease (and other pathogens) with everyday PPE. If a specimen is processed in the lab and it is found later the patient was prion-positive, you do not want to be the one who wasn’t wearing PPE when you handled the specimens. The results will be potentially disastrous for you and your family.

Remember, if you receive a phone call that a CJD or prion specimen is being sent to the lab, escalate the situation immediately. Find out if your lab is able to receive and process that type of specimen. Protect yourself, and keep your lab safe from CJD and other infectious pathogens.

 

Scungio 1

-Dan Scungio, MT(ASCP), SLS, CQA (ASQ) has over 25 years experience as a certified medical technologist. Today he is the Laboratory Safety Officer for Sentara Healthcare, a system of seven hospitals and over 20 laboratories and draw sites in the Tidewater area of Virginia. He is also known as Dan the Lab Safety Man, a lab safety consultant, educator, and trainer.