BACKGROUND: Appropriate histopathology reporting helps to ensure effective therapy and prognosis. OBJECTIVE: To examine compliance with clinical practice guidelines for histopathology reports of melanomas. METHODS: A sample of melanoma histopathology reports in Queensland was audited for inclusion of recommended information. The quality of documentation was constructed and multivariate analysis used to determine factors affecting the quality of reporting practices. RESULTS: Documentation of the most important features of melanoma was high: clear diagnosis (99.8%; 95% CI 98.6-100), thickness (99.8%; 95% CI 98.6-100), comment on adequacy of excision (87.9%; 95% CI 84.9-91.0) and measurement of margins (91.9%; 95% CI 88.8-91.4). Overall reporting of ulceration and regression was of lesser completeness (83.0 and 77.8%, respectively) and these features were more likely to be reported by high-volume laboratories (p < 0.001 and p = 0.037, respectively). This trend was not apparent for other features. Fewer than 50% of reports documented mitotic rate per square millimetre, predominant cell type, microsatellites, growth phase and desmoplasia. CONCLUSION: Awareness of current reporting practices and identification of areas in which insufficiencies exist enable the revision of systems and potential improvements to the transfer of information to treating clinicians. Copyright 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.
BACKGROUND: Appropriate histopathology reporting helps to ensure effective therapy and prognosis. OBJECTIVE: To examine compliance with clinical practice guidelines for histopathology reports of melanomas. METHODS: A sample of melanoma histopathology reports in Queensland was audited for inclusion of recommended information. The quality of documentation was constructed and multivariate analysis used to determine factors affecting the quality of reporting practices. RESULTS: Documentation of the most important features of melanoma was high: clear diagnosis (99.8%; 95% CI 98.6-100), thickness (99.8%; 95% CI 98.6-100), comment on adequacy of excision (87.9%; 95% CI 84.9-91.0) and measurement of margins (91.9%; 95% CI 88.8-91.4). Overall reporting of ulceration and regression was of lesser completeness (83.0 and 77.8%, respectively) and these features were more likely to be reported by high-volume laboratories (p < 0.001 and p = 0.037, respectively). This trend was not apparent for other features. Fewer than 50% of reports documented mitotic rate per square millimetre, predominant cell type, microsatellites, growth phase and desmoplasia. CONCLUSION: Awareness of current reporting practices and identification of areas in which insufficiencies exist enable the revision of systems and potential improvements to the transfer of information to treating clinicians. Copyright 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Authors: John F Thompson; Seng-Jaw Soong; Charles M Balch; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Shouluan Ding; Daniel G Coit; Keith T Flaherty; Phyllis A Gimotty; Timothy Johnson; Marcella M Johnson; Stanley P Leong; Merrick I Ross; David R Byrd; Natale Cascinelli; Alistair J Cochran; Alexander M Eggermont; Kelly M McMasters; Martin C Mihm; Donald L Morton; Vernon K Sondak Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Luiz Guilherme Martins Castro; Maria Cristina Messina; Walter Loureiro; Ricardo Silvestre Macarenco; João Pedreira Duprat Neto; Thais Helena Bello Di Giacomo; Flávia Vasques Bittencourt; Renato Marchiori Bakos; Sérgio Schrader Serpa; Hamilton Ometto Stolf; Gabriel Gontijo Journal: An Bras Dermatol Date: 2015 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.896
Authors: Andrea L Smith; Caroline G Watts; Samuel Robinson; Helen Schmid; Chiao-Han Chang; John F Thompson; Frances Rapport; Anne E Cust Journal: BJGP Open Date: 2020-06-23