RE: Analyzer training

From: Gebhard, David F (david_f_gebhard@groton.pfizer.com)
Date: Mon Jun 11 2001 - 12:19:45 EST


Hello,
	I couldn't agree more with Hank's position of training and the power
of an educated client.
	In a previous position I held a semi-formal principles and theory
session, in front of the instrument and with lots of drawings, and running
various beads to make a point. I limited this to no more than 3 attendees at
a time. The sessions were highly tailored to what the investigator's goal
was, and included lots of hands-on.  After that they went into the pool (the
shallow end). When they inevitably floundered, I would refer them to their
notes and engage them in a deductive analysis of what might be happening (or
not) based on what they knew about how the instruments worked, and how a
data analysis is set  up.  The "Aha!" factor, or "Eureka! Moment" was
satisfying for all. The lab was open 24/7 to those who demonstrated the
ability of independent operation.  This was usually after several weeks of
supervised operation.

	One other note,  I ALWAYS used a fluorescence microscope to orient
the initiate to the physical reality of what is an analog technology.  The
number of trainees and their Supervisors who have little experience with
fluorescence microscopy prior to coming the a FACS lab is large.   A basic
scope with a set of Calibrite beads leads into a productive demonstration of
excitation wavelength specificity, quantum efficiency, and plenty of oohs
and ahhhs.  A simple buccal smear with a drop of PI goes a long way.
Regards,
		Dave G.

David F. Gebhard -Scientist
Exploratory Medicinal Sciences-New Leads
Pfizer Inc
Eastern Point Rd
Groton, CT 06370
860-715-0830



-----Original Message-----
From: Flow Cytometry Core Lab [mailto:flowcyto@mail.MED.UPENN.EDU]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 4:28 PM
To: cyto-inbox
Subject: Re: Analyzer training



>Hi everybody,
>I have some questions to labs who have analyzers with multiple users who
>run their own samples.

Hi Andy,

We run a pretty busy core facility here at Penn. We have a central
core facility with four tabletop instruments and two sorters (soon to
grow to three sorters). We also have two satellite facilities with
two tabletop instruments in each. We serve over 240 Principal
Investigators in four different Colleges throughout the University of
Pennsylvania. I can give you an idea of what works for us.

>
>1.	 What sort of training do you provide for the users who will run
>their own samples? (How long (hours/days/weeks?); what do you cover in the
>training (general flow pronciples/specifics of the instrument/software?);
>how often do you have the training sessions; do you charge for training and
>if so how much)

We've found that the secret to shared labs operating with a minimum
disruption is good training. We invest a lot of time and effort in
it. The most important thing to remember is that most of your users
enjoy learning, especially flow cytometry.

Training for us has grown into two sessions. We start with a formal
presentation  in a lecture format. I use slides provided by one of
the manufacturers, but I plan to peruse the latest collection of
images in Paul Robinson's Purdue Cytometry CD to supplement them.
Paul has a real interest in education as well, and his web site is a
great resource for those of us in the teaching business. If you run a
core lab, you'll find yourself teaching one way or another.

The emphasis in the initial classroom session is on principles and
practice. I try to tailor it to the specific users in that weeks
class. The emphasis, however, is always on basic principles. This is
what makes our training unique. Most users learn a technique in a lab
from someone else in the lab who is doing it already. Young
technologists sometimes end up not seeing the forest for the trees.
So we think this classroom session is real helpful.

We follow the classroom session with a practical session in the lab.
This gives us a chance to go over some housekeeping issues. We talk
about practical things like waste disposal, signing up for time,
cleaning up after your session, etc. But the major emphasis here is
on learning the instrument and its associated software. We provide
samples for people to run, or they can run their own samples if they
like. They learn how to adjust instrument settings, set compensation,
and save their data. The idea is for them to become independent
operators. Which leads into your next question...

>
>2.	 How do you determine if someone is capable to run samples and get
>good data?  (Do you have them take an exam; run samples with you
>supervising, etc.)


Basically, we throw them into the pool and see if they can swim. I
always let them flounder, but I never let them drown. I never deprive
someone of the opportunity to learn by making a mistake. Tabletop
instruments are pretty robust, and we can fix most of the common
things users do in a shared environment. But give your users some
credit. Most of them have the same goals you do; generate consistent
data and take care of the instruments.

>
>The reason I ask this is because I have been doing alot of training
>recently for our XL-MCL (users have 24/7/365 access) and I was curious how
>other labs handle these situations.

It takes a lot of time, but it definitely pays off. We trained over
220 users last calendar year alone. We've been doing it for ten years
now. But educated users are your best defense against potential
problems. They also become strong advocates for you when it comes
time to justify the facility. Principal Investigators see value in a
core facility when they can send a new technologist or student down
to the core lab to learn how to use a cytometer. And over 95% of our
users would prefer to acquire their own data than have us do it for
them. That saves on staffing and makes for a more efficient
operation. It also allows the user to see the value in careful sample
preparation.

>
>Thanks for any and all replies.
>I'll post a summary if I get any responses directly.

I'd be interested in other labs comments as well.

>
>Andy
>
>   Andy Oberyszyn, M.S.
>   The Ohio State University
>   Analytical Cytometry Laboratory
>   416 Comprehensive Cancer Center
>   410 West 12th Avenue
>   Columbus, Ohio 43210
>   Tel: 614/292-FLOW(3569)
>   Fax: 614/292-7335
>   E-Mail: cytometry@osu.edu


The final point I'd make is to listen to your users. Ask them what
they would like in a core facility. Ask them for a critique on your
training. Good teachers are very often good listeners. I think you'll
find the effort spent on training will reap substantial benefits.

Finally, Go Sixers (with another good teacher in Larry Brown)!

Hank

--
Hank Pletcher, Technical Director
Flow Cytometry and Cell Sorting Shared Resource
University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center
297 John Morgan Building
3620 Hamilton Walk
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6082

Voice: 215-898-3528
FAX: 215-898-4227
URL: www.med.upenn.edu/flowcyto
Email: pletcher@mail.med.upenn.edu


LEGAL NOTICE
Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It
is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is
unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents
of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized
and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:57:44 EST