BACKGROUND: With wrong-site surgery being one of the major causes of medical lawsuits in the United States, tools to confirm location are essential. A previous survey of 300 Mohs surgeons revealed that 14% of malpractice cases were due to wrong-site surgery. In dermatologic surgery, photography is helpful in precisely locating biopsy sites. OBJECTIVES: We present a case series of 34 biopsy-proven cutaneous head and neck malignancies performed in our university-based dermatology clinic, comparing the reliability of patient and blinded dermatologist identification with that of biopsy-site photography. RESULTS: Of 34 biopsy sites, the patient and the blinded dermatologist incorrectly identified four (12%). The patient alone incorrectly identified an additional six biopsy sites, resulting in a total of 10 (29%) cases incorrectly identified by the patient. There were no instances in which the patient correctly identified the biopsy site and the blinded dermatologist incorrectly identified it. CONCLUSION: In our current medical environment, in which more than 90% of health care is delivered in a clinic setting, wrong-site surgery is certainly underreported. In adopting a zero-tolerance policy for wrong-site surgeries, biopsy-site photography saves time, money, and potential frustration, hopefully eliminating the number of excisions performed on the wrong site.
BACKGROUND: With wrong-site surgery being one of the major causes of medical lawsuits in the United States, tools to confirm location are essential. A previous survey of 300 Mohs surgeons revealed that 14% of malpractice cases were due to wrong-site surgery. In dermatologic surgery, photography is helpful in precisely locating biopsy sites. OBJECTIVES: We present a case series of 34 biopsy-proven cutaneous head and neck malignancies performed in our university-based dermatology clinic, comparing the reliability of patient and blinded dermatologist identification with that of biopsy-site photography. RESULTS: Of 34 biopsy sites, the patient and the blinded dermatologist incorrectly identified four (12%). The patient alone incorrectly identified an additional six biopsy sites, resulting in a total of 10 (29%) cases incorrectly identified by the patient. There were no instances in which the patient correctly identified the biopsy site and the blinded dermatologist incorrectly identified it. CONCLUSION: In our current medical environment, in which more than 90% of health care is delivered in a clinic setting, wrong-site surgery is certainly underreported. In adopting a zero-tolerance policy for wrong-site surgeries, biopsy-site photography saves time, money, and potential frustration, hopefully eliminating the number of excisions performed on the wrong site.
Authors: Jin-Sil Choi; Yazhen Zhu; Hongsheng Li; Parham Peyda; Thuy Tien Nguyen; Mo Yuan Shen; Yang Michael Yang; Jingyi Zhu; Mei Liu; Mandy M Lee; Shih-Sheng Sun; Yang Yang; Hsiao-Hua Yu; Kai Chen; Gary S Chuang; Hsian-Rong Tseng Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2016-12-20 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Allen G Strickler; Payal Shah; Shirin Bajaj; Richard Mizuguchi; Rajiv I Nijhawan; Mercy Odueyungbo; Anthony Rossi; Désirée Ratner Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2021-01-23 Impact factor: 15.487