Information Adequacy in Histopathology Request Forms: A Milestone in Making a Communication Bridge Between Confusion and Clarity in Medical Diagnosis.

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.5146/tjpath.2022.01595
Fariba Abbasi, Yasaman Asghari, Zahra Niazkhani
{"title":"Information Adequacy in Histopathology Request Forms: A Milestone in Making a Communication Bridge Between Confusion and Clarity in Medical Diagnosis.","authors":"Fariba Abbasi,&nbsp;Yasaman Asghari,&nbsp;Zahra Niazkhani","doi":"10.5146/tjpath.2022.01595","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Information contained in request forms for histopathological examinations plays a critical role in the microscopic interpretation of tissue changes. Despite its importance, studies have shown inadequacies in the information communicated by clinicians. This study aimed to determine how well the necessary information is provided on the histopathology request forms and to compare its variability among different departments of a hospital.</p><p><strong>Material and method: </strong>A retrospective, 3-month, cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate all consecutive histopathology request forms received from different departments of a tertiary, academic hospital for three months, regarding the documentation of 12 criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>None of the 2040 requests received had all the required items. Four items of specimen description, laboratory and imaging findings, and physician contact number were available only in less than 12.5% (range between 0.05 to 12.45%) of the requests. However, four other items of patient name and contact number, physician name, and anatomical site of the lesion were documented in more than 90%. The median number of the documented items was the highest in the surgery and orthopedics (9 items) and the lowest in the pulmonology department (7 items). Comparison between departments showed that the documentation of items in the surgery department were significantly better than that of the ENT, urology, and internal medicine departments (p < 0.001). Also, the internal medicine department was significantly different from all other departments (p < 0.001) except neurosurgery (p=0.88).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results point out a serious gap in the adequacy of pathology request forms, especially clinical items. Given the implication of such information to ensure patient safety, further studies are recommended to evaluate the impact of educational and supportive computerized interventions such as clinician education and barcoding and specimen tracking systems to help fill in the required items completely.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10521200/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5146/tjpath.2022.01595","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Information contained in request forms for histopathological examinations plays a critical role in the microscopic interpretation of tissue changes. Despite its importance, studies have shown inadequacies in the information communicated by clinicians. This study aimed to determine how well the necessary information is provided on the histopathology request forms and to compare its variability among different departments of a hospital.

Material and method: A retrospective, 3-month, cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate all consecutive histopathology request forms received from different departments of a tertiary, academic hospital for three months, regarding the documentation of 12 criteria.

Results: None of the 2040 requests received had all the required items. Four items of specimen description, laboratory and imaging findings, and physician contact number were available only in less than 12.5% (range between 0.05 to 12.45%) of the requests. However, four other items of patient name and contact number, physician name, and anatomical site of the lesion were documented in more than 90%. The median number of the documented items was the highest in the surgery and orthopedics (9 items) and the lowest in the pulmonology department (7 items). Comparison between departments showed that the documentation of items in the surgery department were significantly better than that of the ENT, urology, and internal medicine departments (p < 0.001). Also, the internal medicine department was significantly different from all other departments (p < 0.001) except neurosurgery (p=0.88).

Conclusion: Our results point out a serious gap in the adequacy of pathology request forms, especially clinical items. Given the implication of such information to ensure patient safety, further studies are recommended to evaluate the impact of educational and supportive computerized interventions such as clinician education and barcoding and specimen tracking systems to help fill in the required items completely.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
组织病理学申请表中的信息充分性:在医学诊断的困惑和清晰之间架起沟通桥梁的里程碑。
目的:组织病理学检查申请表中包含的信息在组织变化的微观解释中起着关键作用。尽管它很重要,但研究表明临床医生传达的信息存在不足。本研究旨在确定组织病理学申请表上提供必要信息的情况,并比较医院不同科室之间的差异性。材料和方法:进行了一项为期3个月的回顾性横断面研究,以评估三级学术医院不同科室连续三个月收到的关于12项标准的组织病理学申请表。结果:在收到的2040份申请中,没有一份具备所有要求的项目。只有不到12.5%(0.05至12.45%)的请求中提供了四项样本描述、实验室和影像学检查结果以及医生联系电话。然而,超过90%的患者记录了其他四项,即患者姓名和联系电话、医生姓名和病变解剖部位。记录项目的中位数在外科和骨科最高(9个项目),在肺科最低(7个项目)。科室间比较显示,外科的项目记录明显优于耳鼻喉科、泌尿外科和内科(p<0.001),内科与除神经外科外的所有其他科室有显著差异(p<0.001)(p=0.88)。结论:我们的研究结果指出,在病理申请表,尤其是临床项目的充分性方面存在严重差距。考虑到这些信息对确保患者安全的影响,建议进行进一步的研究,以评估教育和支持性计算机干预措施的影响,如临床医生教育、条形码和样本跟踪系统,以帮助完整填写所需项目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Intentions to move abroad among medical students: a cross-sectional study to investigate determinants and opinions. Analysis of Medical Rehabilitation Needs of 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquake Victims: Adıyaman Example. Efficacy of whole body vibration on fascicle length and joint angle in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Prevalence and predictors of hand hygiene compliance in clinical, surgical and intensive care unit wards: results of a second cross-sectional study at the Umberto I teaching hospital of Rome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1