Sysmex became aware of the treatment change based on the erroneous results on 06/09/2021.The ca-600 instructions for use,chapter 5 - operation, section 5.13 - automatic inquiry, states: the sample id number (nos).For one rack are read from the barcode labels, and inquiries are made to the host computer for those id nos.When the analysis information is received, it is displayed on the screen and analysis is started.The user reported removing the sample rack prematurely.In normal operation, when a sample rack is placed on the analyzer and the start button is pressed, the barcode of each sample is read on the ca-500/600 series analyzers.If an error occurs for any reason after reading the sample barcodes, the analyzer enters a standby mode awaiting resolution by the operator before resuming analysis.The order and patient information from the first rack is retained within the system.At this point, sample aspiration for analysis has not occurred.If the operator incorrectly removes the sample rack and replaces it with a different rack in standby mode, the analyzer would not detect the exchange.After error recovery, sample aspiration for analysis would initiate.The retained order and patient information would be applied to the new sample rack.The root cause could not be confirmed with the information provided.No analyzer deficiency was identified.
|
A user in (b)(6) reported incorrect prothrombin (pt) and international normalized ratio (inr) results led to a patient experiencing a warfarin dosage change.A rack containing five patient samples was placed on the analyzer.The analyzer scanned the barcode of each sample in the rack which generated a sample worklist.The rack was removed prematurely by the operator before sample aspiration began.Another rack of patient samples was placed on the analyzer.As the second rack of samples was analyzed, results were applied to patient id/demographics from the worklist from the first rack.This caused incorrect pt/inr results to be released to the physician.The operator reanalyzed the samples on a different analyzer and corrected reports were issued.One patient experienced a change in their warfarin dose based on the erroneous low pt/inr results that were originally reported.Details of the warfarin dosage change, timeframe of the treatment and patient diagnosis were not provided.There was no alleged patient harm due to the change in the warfarin treatment.There was no report of negative patient impact for the other four samples contained in the first rack.
|