Literature DB >> 20795553

Electronic capture and communication of synoptic cancer data elements from pathology reports: results of the Reporting Pathology Protocols 2 (RPP2) project.

Lewis Hassell1, Wendy Aldinger, Cheryl Moody, Sharon Winters, Ken Gerlach, Molly Schwenn, Deborah Perriello.   

Abstract

Pathology reports represent a rich data source for cancer registries. The College of American Pathologists (CAP) Cancer Checklists present pathology reports in synoptic form and allow registries to be updated electronically. To assess the challenge of employing the CAP Cancer Checklists in pathology laboratories and transmitting that information to cancer registries, we conducted a pilot project: the Reporting Pathology Protocols project (RPP2). The RPP2 project was a multi-year, "proof of concept" demonstration that assessed pathology report-generated data for 3 CAP Cancer Checklists (breast, prostate, and melanoma) in several different cancer registry-pathology laboratory combinations in 3 states. Collaborating pathology laboratories and state cancer registries in California, Maine, and Pennsylvania identified key questions (queries) to address in the course of the project, developed and tested standardized HL7 messaging specifications to link senders and recipients, and then assessed the actual process results using either parallel reporting or retrospective-prospective cases for each tumor type. Successful electronic transfer and capture of pertinent data elements for numerous examples of each tumor type was accomplished in each participating cancer registry/reporting laboratory/information system combination. We noted shortcomings in the electronically encoded CAP Checklists as opposed to text-based reports, particularly for breast cancers. We uncovered opportunities to improve Checklists and the information systems that incorporate them. Workflow, productivity, and timeliness of reporting are areas where electronically encoded reports may enhance cancer registry processes. The accuracy and completeness of electronically encoded data appears largely comparable to text-based data, but subject to the degree of synchrony between the formats of text-based and electronic reports.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20795553

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Registry Manag        ISSN: 1945-6131


  9 in total

Review 1.  "Minimally invasive research?" Use of the electronic health record to facilitate research in pediatric urology.

Authors:  Vijaya M Vemulakonda; Ruth A Bush; Michael G Kahn
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2018-06-09       Impact factor: 1.830

Review 2.  Challenges in the pathology of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a dialogue between the urologic surgeon and the pathologist.

Authors:  Donna E Hansel; Jeremy S Miller; Michael S Cookson; Sam S Chang
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Merging Electronic Health Record Data and Genomics for Cardiovascular Research: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Jennifer L Hall; John J Ryan; Bruce E Bray; Candice Brown; David Lanfear; L Kristin Newby; Mary V Relling; Neil J Risch; Dan M Roden; Stanley Y Shaw; James E Tcheng; Jessica Tenenbaum; Thomas N Wang; William S Weintraub
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Genet       Date:  2016-03-14

4.  ERG Immunohistochemistry as an Endothelial Marker for Assessing Lymphovascular Invasion.

Authors:  Sehun Kim; Hyung Kyu Park; Ho Young Jung; So-Young Lee; Kyueng-Whan Min; Wook Youn Kim; Hye Seung Han; Wan Seop Kim; Tae Sook Hwang; So Dug Lim
Journal:  Korean J Pathol       Date:  2013-08-26

5.  The undiscovered country: the future of integrating genomic information into the EHR.

Authors:  Joseph L Kannry; Marc S Williams
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-09-26       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 6.  Synoptic Reporting: Evidence-Based Review and Future Directions.

Authors:  Andrew A Renshaw; Mercy Mena-Allauca; Edwin W Gould; S Joseph Sirintrapun
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2018-12

7.  Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study.

Authors:  J E M Swillens; C E Sluijter; L I H Overbeek; I D Nagtegaal; R P M G Hermens
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2019-07-03       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 8.  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

9.  Performance of a Web-based Method for Generating Synoptic Reports.

Authors:  Megan A Renshaw; Scott A Renshaw; Mercy Mena-Allauca; Patricia P Carrion; Xiaorong Mei; Arniris Narciandi; Edwin W Gould; Andrew A Renshaw
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2017-03-10
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.