Back to Search Start Over

Interpretive Diagnostic Error Reduction in Surgical Pathology and Cytology: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center and the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology

Authors :
Nakhleh, Raouf E.
Nosee, Vania
Colasacco, Carol
Fatheree, Lisa A.
Lillemoe, Tamera J.
McCrory, Douglas C.
Meier, Frederick A.
Otis, Christopher N.
Owens, Scott R.
Raab, Stephen S.
Turner, Roderick R.
Ventura, Christina B.
Renshaw, Andrew A.
Source :
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine. January, 2016, Vol. 140 Issue 1, 29
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

Context.--Additional reviews of diagnostic surgical and cytology cases have been shown to detect diagnostic discrepancies. Objective.--To develop, through a systematic review of the literature, recommendations for the review of pathology cases to detect or prevent interpretive diagnostic errors. Design.--The College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center in association with the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology convened an expert panel to develop an evidence-based guideline to help define the role of case reviews in surgical pathology and cytology. A literature search was conducted to gather data on the review of cases in surgical pathology and cytology. Results.--The panel drafted 5 recommendations, with strong agreement from open comment period participants ranging from 87% to 93%. The recommendations are: (1) anatomic pathologists should develop procedures for the review of selected pathology cases to detect disagreements and potential interpretive errors; (2) anatomic pathologists should perform case reviews in a timely manner to avoid having a negative impact on patient care; (3) anatomic pathologists should have documented case review procedures that are relevant to their practice setting; (4) anatomic pathologists should continuously monitor and document the results of case reviews; and (5) if pathology case reviews show poor agreement within a defined case type, anatomic pathologists should take steps to improve agreement. Conclusions.--Evidence exists that case reviews detect errors; therefore, the expert panel recommends that anatomic pathologists develop procedures for the review of pathology cases to detect disagreements and potential interpretive errors, in order to improve the quality of patient care. (Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016; 140:29-40; doi: 10.5858/arpa.2014-0511-SA)<br />The test cycle in surgical pathology and cytology is similar to the test cycle of other laboratory tests. (1-4) It is composed of the preanalytic, analytic, and postanalytic phases. The [...]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
15432165
Volume :
140
Issue :
1
Database :
Gale General OneFile
Journal :
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsgcl.510652603
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2014-0511-SA