Literature DB >> 1444738

Interinstitutional assessment of colorectal carcinoma surgical pathology report adequacy. A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of practice patterns from 532 laboratories and 15,940 reports.

R J Zarbo1.   

Abstract

In 1991, the College of American Pathologist's Q-Probes Quality Improvement Program evaluated practices in 532 institutions for pathologic information provided in surgical pathology reports of 15,940 resected primary colorectal carcinomas. Participating institutions studied their last 30 completed cases and were from the United States (98%), Canada (1.5%), and Australia (0.4%). The influence of various institutional differences and other practice patterns were analyzed to determine factors associated with an increased institutional likelihood of providing information on pathology reports. The one practice significantly associated with increased likelihood of providing complete oncologic pathology information on eight of 11 gross and microscopic information items surveyed was the use of a standard report form or checklist. Other institutional differences bearing inconsistent associations included teaching institution status, presence of pathology residency, use of microscopic descriptions, institution bedsize category, and performance of DNA ploidy analysis. The development and adoption of a standardized report form or checklist for each case is a simple but effective means to assure report adequacy and consistent communication of oncologic pathology information. In conjunction with accompanying criteria for its accurate use, this process can be considered a practice guideline or practice parameter that can be extended to the surgical pathology examination of all resected malignant neoplasms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1444738

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med        ISSN: 0003-9985            Impact factor:   5.534


  15 in total

1.  Health System-Level Factors Influence the Implementation of Complex Innovations in Cancer Care.

Authors:  Robin Urquhart; Lois Jackson; Joan Sargeant; Geoffrey A Porter; Eva Grunfeld
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2015-11

2.  Standardized reporting of histological diagnoses for non-neoplastic liver conditions in needle biopsies.

Authors:  M p Foschini; F Sarti; R E Dina; G Giuliani-Picari; P R Dal Monte; V Eusebi
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  Early Stage Bladder Cancer: Do Pathology Reports Tell Us What We Need to Know?

Authors:  Florian R Schroeck; Erik A Pattison; Daniel W Denhalter; Olga V Patterson; Scott L DuVall; John D Seigne; Douglas J Robertson; Brenda Sirovich; Philip P Goodney
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Synoptic Versus Narrative Reporting of Prostate Biopsies at a Tertiary Healthcare Institution: Challenges, successes and expectations.

Authors:  Nnamdi O Orah; Charles C Anunobi; Rufus W Ojewola
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2017-10-10

5.  Exploring the interpersonal-, organization-, and system-level factors that influence the implementation and use of an innovation-synoptic reporting-in cancer care.

Authors:  Robin Urquhart; Geoffrey A Porter; Eva Grunfeld; Joan Sargeant
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 7.327

6.  Web-based synoptic reporting for cancer checklists.

Authors:  Brett W Baskovich; Robert W Allan
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2011-03-15

7.  An audit of breast cancer pathology reporting in Australia in 1995.

Authors:  A Kricker; B Armstrong; C Smith; M Bilous; C Camaris; A Mayer; T Psarianos
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Trends in Accuracy and Comprehensiveness of Pathology Reports for Resected NSCLC in a High Mortality Area of the United States.

Authors:  Matthew P Smeltzer; Yu-Sheng Lee; Nicholas R Faris M Div; Carrie Fehnel; Olawale Akinbobola; Meghan Meadows-Taylor; David Spencer; Elizabeth Sales; Sherry Okun; Christopher Giampapa; Amal Anga; Alicia Pacheco; Meredith A Ray; Raymond U Osarogiagbon
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 20.121

9.  Factors affecting the implementation and use of electronic templates for histopathology cancer reporting.

Authors:  Bettina Casati; Hans Kristian Haugland; Gunn Marit J Barstad; Roger Bjugn
Journal:  Pathology       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.306

Review 10.  The effects of implementing synoptic pathology reporting in cancer diagnosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Caro E Sluijter; Luc R C W van Lonkhuijzen; Henk-Jan van Slooten; Iris D Nagtegaal; Lucy I H Overbeek
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 4.064

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.