Red Cross agrees to upgrade blood safety
Hospital Safety Connection, April 16, 2003
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Hospital Safety Connection!
After a string of governmental complaints about its safety record, the Red Cross agreed April 11 to meet new federal safety standards, the Associated Press reports.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reached a settlement with the Red Cross to improve blood collection procedures. Under the deal, fines for various violations could total up to 1% of the Red Cross' $1.9 billion in annual revenues-or $19 million-in the first year, increasing to a maximum of 4% by the fourth year.
Two years ago, the FDA went to court seeking a contempt citation against the Red Cross for not following a 1993 agreement to meet blood safety standards. The settlement will be submitted to the judge in that case for approval.
There are overlapping safety procedures in effect and any breach of the safeguards doesn't necessarily result in unsafe blood products, the FDA said. The Red Cross provides about 45% of the U.S. blood supply. Independent blood centers collect another 45% and hospitals collect the remainder.
In its most recent Red Cross inspection last December, the FDA cited numerous problems, including a lack of management control and quality assurance oversight that could lead to a patient receiving potentially unsafe blood. The FDA found records altered to allow the Red Cross to accept blood from an unsuitable donor, failure to keep good inventory records in the case of a blood product recall, and mislabeled blood products.
For more information on the agreement, visit http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2003/NEW00891.html
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Hospital Safety Connection!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- HIPAA Q&A: Answering service messages
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- Are your workforce members texting PHI?
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- CMS issues IPPS proposed rule for FY 2013
- E-mailed
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Are your workforce members texting PHI?
- Don't let these sentinel events trigger falsely
- Arkansas woman convicted for HIPAA violation
- Reasons for inadequate fluid intake in the elderly
- Q&A tackles coding questions about injections and infusions
- Joint Commission Center announces handoff communication solutions
- Inside best practice: Reduce patient falls with a stoplight
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Hospitalist-surgeon comanagement has no effect on outcomes
- Searched
