Do Neoplastic Surgical Pathology Reports Contain Redundant Information?
Negar Rassaei, Carlos E Parra-Herran, Vania Nose. University of Miami – Jackson Memorial Hospital, FL
Background: The College of American Pathologists (CAP) requires the CAP cancer protocol to be completed for each cancer case. Some institutions such as ours include two parts in their cancer surgical pathology reports (CSPR), one contains the main diagnosis and histologic findings as sequenced by the pathologist and the second part includes the CAP cancer protocol. With an increasing array of additional studies and information reported, the CSPR may contain redundant information, raising the question as to whether the clinician can glean the essential information required for diagnosis and patient management by one or another and/or both sections.
Design: Our clinicians and pathologists were asked to complete a survey and rank which part of the reports is most important to them with the purpose to have a feedback from clinicians on the content of our CSPR. Our survey asked clinicians and pathologists to rank the parts of the CSPR as follows; A: the initial section including the main diagnosis and histologic findings as sequenced by the pathologist, B: the CAP cancer protocol, C: both sections.
Results: Twenty-five clinicians of different subspecialties (Oncology-surgery, oncology, gynecology-oncology, hemato-oncology, pulmonology, radiation-oncology, and radiology) and twelve pathologists returned our survey. From our clinicians, 68% consider both sections as essential in the CSPR, among which, surgeons and oncologists in particular, consider both parts as essential. 24% consider the section A as sufficient in CSPR. 8% consider the CAP protocol to be complete and sufficient for diagnosis and patient management. From the 12 pathologists that participated in this survey, 41% consider both sections should be included in the CSPR, 25% consider the CAP protocol as sufficient to convey the essential information to the clinicians and 34% of pathologists consider the initial section containing all the diagnostic information as sequenced by themselves to be sufficient.
Conclusions: Adequate and continuous communication between pathologists and clinicians is essential to deliver important diagnostic findings for the appropriate patient management. Feedback from our clinicians, as our customers, is crucial as a quality management tool. This study shows that our clinicians prefer a complete report with cancer CAP protocol, and with the inclusion of a heading highlighting the main diagnosis and important findings.
Category: Quality Assurance
Monday, February 28, 2011 1:00 PM
Poster Session II # 225, Monday Afternoon