Question about CBC /machine result and retic count.

[upstudent]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

HI , when you get a CBC back form the machine, or lab, do they habitually give you corrected retic counts, or do you have to calculate that? and are those corrected counts corrected again by the machine /lab for polychromasia, or do you have to count that too and how do you know, whether or not it has been auto corrected?

Thanks !!!!!!!

 

[gutonc]

Dude...stop posting homework help questions in the resident forums.

 

[upstudent]

This is not something that really I can tread a book and answer for myself. If there is a book or a search query that I can ask google , I would do it. Isn't this a question a resident asks when being asked to draw blood?

Which part of the site would you suggest posting such questions?

 

[3.14isUnreal]

This is not something that really I can tread a book and answer for myself. If there is a book or a search query that I can ask google , I would do it. Isn't this a question a resident asks when being asked to draw blood?

Which part of the site would you suggest posting such questions?

Call your lab. If the MT doesn't know, speak with the director. Do not fear the director, they have all but a bachelors degree.
All lab questions are answered this way.

 

[upstudent]

thanks . I guess I will evetually have to do that lol.

 

[Chimichica]

I'm an MT so here is the answer. When a CBC is ordered and we run it, not all machines correct for NRBCs or retics. If there are retics present, I believe greater than 1% is considered abnormal. Most machines that are newer correct automatically for retics but it's best of they are ordered together. Second if the retics count is too high or they're are a large amount of NRBCS then the technologist is supposed to manually correct the WBC count. Either way standard practice deems that the results released have been corrected (we don't want you treating based off uncorrected results). Now as far as polychromasia, poly chromatic cells are not necessarily retics. They are so to speak a slightly immature RBC or due to other RBC deficiencies and may not directly correlate with retics or NRBCS and thus that's why it is enumerated in result reporting as 1+ 2+ etc.