Literature DB >> 24493074

The feasibility of computer-aided monitoring of the workflow in surgical pathology: a five-year experience.

Chih-En Tseng1, Hsiu-Huei Chiang, Liang-Yu Shih, Kai-Sheng Liao.   

Abstract

To explore the feasibility of computer-aided monitoring of the workflow in surgical pathology. We collected 5-year data about computer-aided monitoring of the workflow in surgical pathology and analyzed the four subprocesses in the surgical pathologic process: 1) from arranging surgical pathology examination to receipt of the examination sheet and sample by the laboratory; 2) from receipt of the sample to issuance of the pathology report; 3) from issuance of the pathology report to automatic computer forwarding of positive pathology reports by e-mail to the physician who ordered the examination; 4) from receipt of the positive report by the physician to his/her response of acknowledging receipt. A total 115,648 surgical pathological cases were reviewed in this study. The overdue rate of delivery of samples was 0.82%. The most common cause (62.92%) of overdue delivery was clinicians in the outpatient department arranging for the examination more than 1 day in advance of specimen collection. The cumulative rates of report completion within 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 work days were 12.82%, 53.56%, 86.42%, 95.90% and 98.85%, respectively. The rate of overdue reporting was 1.15% over the 5-year study. The most common cause (56.30%) of overdue reporting was case complexity. The learning time for adapting this subprocess of report issuance was 7 months. There were 12,151 positive reports (10.51% of all cases) that required automatic computer forwarding to the physicians' e-mail boxes. A total of 113 cases (0.93%) failed in automatic computer forwarding during the 5-year period. The learning time for constructing a stable automatic computer forwarding system was 2.5 years. Of the 12,038 reports successfully forwarded, 10,107 (83.96%) were received by physicians and acknowledged by automated receipt within 120 h, and the other 1,931 (16.04%) showed no response within 120 h. The major reason for an overdue reply was that the physicians did not check their e-mail boxes (94.89%). We used a preliminary computer-aided system to monitor the workflow in surgical pathology. This system might be used as one of the methods of quality assurance in surgical pathology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24493074     DOI: 10.1007/s10916-014-0014-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Syst        ISSN: 0148-5598            Impact factor:   4.460


  24 in total

Review 1.  Quality in surgical pathology communication and reporting.

Authors:  Raouf E Nakhleh
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 5.534

2.  A preliminary diagnosis service provides prospective blinded dual-review of all general surgical pathology cases in an academic practice.

Authors:  Jamie A Weydert; Barry R De Young; Michael B Cohen
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 6.394

3.  Analysis of turnaround times in pathology: an approach using failure time analysis.

Authors:  Robin T Vollmer
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.493

4.  Intraoperative consultation/final diagnosis correlation: relationship to tissue type and pathologic process.

Authors:  Valerie A White; Martin J Trotter
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 5.534

5.  Anatomic pathology and patient safety: it's not an error: it's a diagnostic misadventure!

Authors:  Dana Marie Grzybicki; Stephen S Raab; Janine E Janosky; Collen Vrbin-Turcsanyi; Stephen Bruno; Richard J Zarbo; Chad H Stone; Frederick A Meier; Kim R Geisinger; A Julian Gavin
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.493

Review 6.  Quality in cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Stephen S Raab; Dana M Grzybicki
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2010 May-Jun       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Interinstitutional comparison of frozen section consultations. A college of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 90,538 cases in 461 institutions.

Authors:  G N Gephardt; R J Zarbo
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 5.534

8.  Surgical specimen identification errors: a new measure of quality in surgical care.

Authors:  Martin A Makary; Jonathan Epstein; Peter J Pronovost; E Anne Millman; Emily C Hartmann; Julie A Freischlag
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2007-01-24       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Developing and pilot testing practical measures of preanalytic surgical specimen identification defects.

Authors:  Paul J Bixenstine; Richard J Zarbo; Christine G Holzmueller; Gayane Yenokyan; Raymond Robinson; Daniel W Hudson; Arlene M Prescott; Ron Hubble; Mary M Murphy; Chris T George; Rita D'Angelo; Sam R Watson; Lisa H Lubomski; Sean M Berenholtz
Journal:  Am J Med Qual       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 1.852

10.  Interinstitutional comparison of surgical biopsy diagnosis turnaround time: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 5384 surgical biopsies in 157 small hospitals.

Authors:  D A Novis; R J Zarbo; A J Saladino
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 5.534

View more
  1 in total

1.  The current and future needs of our medical systems.

Authors:  Jesse M Ehrenfeld
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2015-02-01       Impact factor: 4.460

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.